Skip to main content

Full text of "Processed World"

See other formats 


UJDRLD  14 


»fis 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2010 


http://www.archive.org/details/processedworld14proc 


%S5SffiftWSSaWS5ft¥ftW: 


>!■!■!•!■%!■!■!■!■!-!■!•!•■.%!■%%!■■■! 


i^PRDCESSED  LUDRLD  14  ji 


Talking  Heads 2 

Letters 3 

Equal  Opportunity  Parents: 

Just  How  Equal  Can  We  Be? 15 

Article  by  Maxine  Holz 

Motherhood  &  Politics? 21 

Article  by  Monica  Slade 

Computer  Education  =  Processed  Kids? 24 

interview  with  Herbert  Kohl 

LEGO:  A  'Play  System'  for  Modular  Thinking 30 

Article  by  Imma  Harms 

Poetry 34 

Maximin,  Lipschutz,  Barclay,  DeRugeris,  Lifshin,  Schaffer,  Breiding 

A  Day  In  The  Life  of  Employee  #85292 36 

Tale  of  Toil  by  Jay  Clemens 

International  Loafers  &  Winos  Union 41    ^    ^-» 

Fiction  by  Jeff  Goldthorpe 

Unwanted  Guests 43   «   ;»tt 

Article  by  Dennis  Hayes 

Cover  Graphic  by:  Louis  Michaelson 

All  of  the  articles  and  stories  in  Processed  World  reflect  thie  views  and  fantasies  of  thie  authtor  and  not 
necessarily  thiose  of  other  editors  or  contributors. 

CREDITS:  Jay  Clemens,  Lucius  Cabins,  Helen  Highwater,  Maxine  Holz,  Louis  Michaelson,  Zoe  Noe,  Med-0,  Dennis  Hayes, 
Linda  Thomas,  Ana  Logue,  Primitivo  Morales,  Emily,  D.S.  Black,  Paxa  Lourde,  Kelly  Girl,  Stephen  Marks,  Bea  Rose,  Gene 
Eric  Mann,  Boz,  Friends  of  the  Toad,  Clayton  Sheridan,  J  C.  Jr.,  The  Big  Mud  Duck,  Canary  Tracing,  Sheba  of  Sheboygan, 
Datadybbuk,  D.J.  Discrash,  Steve  C,  Persky,    Frog,  J.  Vorhees,  and  many  others... 


This  new  format  cost  us  about  $2000  to  produce.  Processed  World  depends  on  subscriptions  and  bookstore  sales,  so  if 
you'd  like  to  have  PW  sent  directly  to  your  home  and  help  us  to  keep  on  publishing,  PLEASE  SUBSCRIBE!! 


B 


$  5 
$  10 
$  15 
$  25 
$  50 
$100 
$150 


SUBSCRIPTIONS  (for  4  issues) 


Low  Income 

Regular 

Libraries/ Overseas  Sea  Mail 

Overseas  institutions/ Overseas  Air  Mail 

Sustainer  (High  Income) 

Lifetime  Subscription  (Life  of  magazine!) 

Corporations  &  Gov't  Agencies 


Name:  

Address:  City: 

State:  Zip:  Country: 

Start  my  subscription  with  PW#:.... 


Back  Issues  1-13        $3.00  each 

Outside  of  U.S.:  Please  send  $  in  U.S.  Funds,  Int'l  Money  Order,  etc. ..Thanks! 

MAIL  TO:  Processed  World,  55  Sutter  St.  #829,  San  Francisco,  CA  94104  USA 


B 


lir-v 


,-,-.-.--*%SS%S»SV-VSV-%%SSV«%V!-»^.---.-.-.-.-.^^^^^ 


s 


Summer  1985     • 


'The  Magazine  With  A  Bad  Attitude" 
_  _  , 


ISSN  0735-9381 


tAilkJ 


Processed  World  #14  marks  a  couple  of  beginnings:  we  have  gone  to  a  larger  format  primarily  to 
provide  more  graphic  possibilities,  and  this  is  the  first  time  our  special  theme  is  on  questions 
involving  children,  childcare,  and  learning. 

Maxine  Holz  combines  a  look  at  feminist  gender  identity  theory  with  a  discussion  of  her  own  trials 
and  tribulations  as  a  new  parent  in  Equal  Opportunity  Parents:  Just  How  Equal  Can  We  Be?  In 
Motherhood  and  Politics?  Monica  Slade  offers  an  impassioned  defense  of  having  children  as  a 
political  act,  and  analyzes  the  problems  of  anti-child  discrimination  in  society  at  large  as  well  as 
within  oppositional  political  movements. 

Radical  educator  Herbert  Kohl  is  interviewed  in  Computer  Education  =  Processed  Kids?  wherein 
he  discusses  his  views  on  the  relationship  between  kids  and  computers  and  the  uses  of  computers  in 
education.  Taking  a  different  approach  to  education  and  "toys"  is  the  article  on  Lego  "play 
systems"  translated  from  a  West  German  magazine. 

Our  ongoing  focus  on  the  Underside  of  the  Information  Age  continues  with  a  revealing  Tale  of  Toil 
about  working  in  a  Hewlett-Packard  factory  in  Silicon  Valley,  A  Day  in  the  Life  of  Employee  #85292. 
Also,  Dennis  Hayes  dissects  government  and  corporate  research  into  computer  hazards  in  a  survey 
of  VDT  and  other  dangers  called  Unwanted  Guests. 

Jeff  Goldthorpe's  fictional  account  of  being  a  refugee  in  his  own  union  hall  after  a  stint  at  college, 
International  Loafers  and  Wines  Union,  along  with  a  selection  of  poetry  round  out  this  issue. 


Those  of  you  who  are  subscribers  received  our  appeal  for  funds  after  our  harrassment  and  eviction 
late  last  year.  The  instigator  of  the  eviction.  Bob  Black  (a.k.a.  "The  Last  International"),  continues 
his  obsessive  campaign  to  destroy  Processed  World.  His  2  year  vendetta  (so  far,  1  smashed  down 
door,  a  glued  lock,  a  busted  lower  lip,  and  some  magazines  slashed  in  different  Bay  Area 
bookstores),  climaxed  in  June  when  he  was  interrupted  at  2  A.M.  pouring  gasoline  under  our  front 
door,  and  over  the  front  of  the  building  in  which  PW  has  its  shop.  By  pure  luck  a  resident  of  the 
building  came  home  at  just  the  right  moment  but  unfortunately  Black  escaped  into  the  night.  Had  he 
succeeded  it's  possible  that  several  people  living  here  would  have  been  killed.  He's  believed  to  have 
left  the  Bay  Area  so  if  he  turns  up  in  your  city,  watch  out! 


This  new  format  is  an  experiment  so  let  us  know  how  you  like  it — we  might  be  forced  back  to  the 
smaller  size  for  money  reasons  anyway.  Keep  sending  us  your  wonderful  letters.  Articles,  stories, 
poetry,  photos,  and  graphics  are  always  welcome  too  (send  copies  cuz  we  can't  guarantee  its 
return!).  And  send  us  money!  Subscribe!  Buy  subscriptions  for  all  your  friends...  Send  donations 
(we  hope  to  have  tax-deductible  status  soon)...  Heeeeellpp!! 

Processed  World,  55  Sutter  Street  #829,  San  Francisco,  California,  94104,  USA 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


iJUUimU  As  a  prelude  to 


.r->,  >r-v  >r-).  >-).,<->,  x-i.  x-y^. 


As  a  prelude  to  this  issue's  Letters  section  we  are  featuring  the 
following  exchange  of  views.  The  2  opening  letters  from  different  readers 
overlap  somewhat  in  the  questions  they  raise.  They've  prompted  a  fair 
amount  of  discussion  and  debate  among  PWers.  In  order  to  show  more  of 
our  own  diversity,  and  to  demonstrate  the  broad  nature  of  the  discussion, 
we  are  printing  six  of  our  responses.  We  urge  others  to  contribute  their 
views  to  this  perhaps  recurrent  feature: 


Vf^xiW-vU^-i 


^sr^spssr 


Dear  PW: 

I  am  a  temporary  word  processor  and  I 
read  your  magazine.  As  I  read  it,  it 
becomes  obvious  what  you  are  against: 
routine,  alienating  dull  work.  But  what  are 
you  for?  Since  you  do  not  like  the  way 
offices  are  generally  organized,  what  do 
you  see  as  an  alternative?  I  would  like  you 
to  discuss  these  questions  in  your  maga- 
zine. 

There  are  many  alternatives  that  people 
hold  up  as  models  of  non-alienating  or- 
ganizations. 


FUTURE?!?  WHAT  FUTURE?? 

Some  models  you  may  see  in  a  business 
school.  There  they  sometimes  talk  of  socio- 
technically  designed  offices  where  workers 
are  organized  into  autonomous  work 
groups  that  have  no  supervisor  per  se. 
Instead  the  workers  share  leadership  re- 
sponsibilities. They  get  paid  according  to 
the  number  of  skills  they  learn  as  opposed 
to  according  to  how  long  they've  worked 
there.  Instead  of  hiring  a  janitor,  main- 
tenance person  or  other  person  to  do  the 
shit  work,  they  are  responsible  for  doing 
the  work  themselves.  No  one  person  gets 


stuck  with  the  shit  work.  No  one  person 
becomes  boss  or  leader.  They  rotate  jobs. 
Is  this  your  model? 

Or  do  you  consider  giving  all  the  typing, 
filing,  word  processing  and  etc.  to  one 
person  (the  temp,  the  secretary  or  who- 
ever) to  be  sticking  him  or  her  with  all  the 
shitwork?  Would  this  make  your  ideal  a 
company  like  PeoplExpress  where  there 
are  no  secretaries  and  if  the  president 
wants  to  send  out  a  letter,  he  writes  it  by 
hand?  Workers  there  also  have  some 
limited  ownership  of  the  company. 

Is  your  model  a  socialist  one?  Is  it  an 
anarchist  one?  Does  your  model  come  from 
the  way  collectives  were  run  in  anarchist 
Spain  during  the  civil  war  in  the  30's?  Does 
your  model  come  from  the  way  collectives 
and  cooperatives  operate  now?  Does  your 
model  come  from  the  workplace  democracy 
school  of  thought  (Paul  Bernstein,  Daniel 
Zwerdling,  Jean  Neuman  and  others)?  Is 
the  PW  organization  a  model  of  unalie- 
nated office  and  production  work?  Or  is 
your  work  there  alienated? 

So  one  question  I  have  for  you  is  — 
"What  is  your  idea  of  how  an  office  or 
organization  should  be  run?"  This  leads  to 
other  questions.  How  do  you  suggest  we  go 
from  where  we  are  now  to  where  you  wish 
to  go?  Pieces  in  your  magazine  advocate 
sabotage  and  theft,  how  does  sabotage  or 
theft  move  us  closer  to  your  vision  of  how 
offices  or  organizations  should  be  run? 

Or  maybe  I  am  barking  up  the  wrong 
tree  and  you  are  against  any  and  all  forms 
of  organization,  including  your  own.  May- 
be you  have  not  even  thought  about  better 
situations.  Do  you  exist  just  to  object  to  the 
way  things  are  without  thought  of  an  alter- 
native or  ways  to  create  an  alternative? 
Will  you  even  answer  these  questions? 
Perhaps  you  will  give  a  quick  flip  response 
or  no  response  because  you  are  too  lazy  to 
think  about  this. 

To  change  society,  it  helps  dramatically 
to  know  what  you  want  to  change  it  into. 

The  power  of  your  publication  would  be 
greatly  increased  if  you  began  to  address 
these  questions. 

D.M. -Downey.  CA 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


j         I'm  studying 
f?>.      interior  design. 


||llllll|||llllll||llllill||IIIIIIIIllllllit||tllllllUlillillUllllill||lllllll||lt 


Hello  there  staffers, 

It  is  true.  I  am  white,  well-educated  and 
working  in  "management."  I  am  also  an 
artist.  I  am  also  a  former  hippy,  a  leftover 
radical/burnout  from  the  heady  60's.  Let's 
see,  what  other  whistles  can  I  blow  on 
myself???  Ah,  yes,  I  am  a  woman,  and  a 
feminist. 

I  put  "management"  in  quotes  because 
the  net  result  of  all  my  "lost"  years  and 
radical  history  has  only  just  brought  me  to 
the  point  where  I  needn't  be  the  first  to 
answer  the  telephone  when  it  rings 
anymore.  Also,  I  sometimes  have  to  super- 
vise people  in  order  to  complete  my 
assigned  tasks  and  duties.  Please  don't 
think  this  means  I  have  any  power  over 
either  the  direction  or  the  form  of  the 
organization.  .  .  because  I  don't. 

Most  of  the  railing  comments  against 
management  in  your  publication  are  under- 
standable. I  am  sure  I  would  not  be  able  to 
get  hired,  much  less  be  able  to  work  in  a 
modern,  electronic  "back-office.  .  ."  I  even 
believe  in  stealing  time  on  the  job  (who  can 
truly  do  bullshit  efficiently  more  than  6 
hours  a  day,  anyway?),  and  refusing  to 
cater  to  the  concept  of  hierarchical  author- 
ity has  long  been  a  factor  in  my  somewhat 
undistinguished  "business  careerl" 

Still,  I  have  about  as  much  interest  in 
putting  the  "means  of  production  "  under 
the  control  of  the  average  "co-worker"  as  I 
have  in  living  through  the  results  of  a 
nuclear  attack.  Let's  be  honest.  It  is  real 
easy  to  bitch  and  moan  and  feel  self- 
righteous.  It  is  far  more  difficult  to  come  up 
with  a  coherent  workable  plan  to  transform 
the  social  and  economic  problems  into 
Utopian  solutions. 

Hatred  is  hatred  and  bigotry  is  bigotry. 
The  tyranny  of  the  "working  class  "  would 
only  be  worse  than  what  we  have  at 
present. 

I  find  genuine  joy  in  inspiring  people 
(supervising)  to  successfully  accomplish 
tasks  that  need  doing  in  order  to  keep  food 
on  everyone's  table  (management).  Sup- 
pose you  don't  like  working  for,  say,  banks, 
and  you  aren't  able  to  figure  out  how  to 


find  a  job  that  isn't  for  a  bank.  Then,  why 
should  I  trust  that  you  are  going  to  be 
creative  enough  to  protect  my  needs  (if  you 
succeed  in  putting  yourself  in  charge) 
without  any  agreed  upon  plan  for  rebuild- 
ing the  society?  Your  very  inability  to  find 
some  less  exploitative  job  tells  me  that  you 
have  trouble  with  planning  and  implemen- 
tation in  your  own  life.  No  question  that  it 
isn't  easy  to  find  worthwhile  work,  but  it 
isn't  impossible.  Formulating  a  new  social 
structure  will  be  far  more  difficult  than 
finding  a  new  jobl  1 

My  personal  preference  is  that  we  stop 
carping  about  technology  and  learn  to  use 
it  to  our  own  purposes.  Computers  are  not 
going  to  disappear.  Our  hope  and  our  op- 
portunity is  in  creating  alternative  struc- 
tures or  "information  networks,"  if  you 
will,  from  which  "common  people"  can 
begin  to  learn  to  speak  openly  with  one 
another.  Here's  our  chance  to  form  true 
grass-roots  organizations  without  the  con- 
straints of  "mass  media"  redefining  the 
"movement"  out  from  under  us  on  a  daily 
basis. 

It  will  not  be  enough  to  dismantle  the 
authoritarian  power  structure  of  the  world. 
At  this  point  in  history,  sad  to  say,  that 
structure  is  only  symptomatic  of  the  real 
problem...  individuals  have  insulated 
themselves  from  one  another  and  have 
personally  abdicated  any  responsibility  for 
the  world  being  in  the  mess  that  it  is  in.  No 
go,  guys!!!  We  are  all  responsible.  We 
need  to  begin  to  unite  and  speak  together 
about  real  solutions,  as  opposed  to  pre- 
tending we  will  become  powerful  by 
destroying  "capital  resources." 

We  will  never  defeat  the  power  brokers 
unless  we  can  unite  the  majority  into  acting 
for  a  plan  that  has  some  hope  of  providing 
for  everyone's  livelihood  in  some  practical, 
easy  to  comprehend  fashion. 

I  understand  the  need  to  rant  and  rave 
and  let  off  steam.  The  injustice  and  horror 
is  all  very  real.  It's  just  that  we  need  to 
remember  not  to  let  ranting  and  raving 
become  a  substitute  for  problem  solving. 
Because  after  the  "revolution,"  ranting 
and  raving  are  just  another  form  of 
tyranny. 

Thank  you  for  the  opportunity  to  com- 
municate. 

F.L.  —Santa  Monica,  CA 


ANA LOGUE 

When  I  joined  the  Processed  World  col- 
lective, nobody  asked  me  what  my  politics 
were.  In  fact,  my  faith  in  historical 
processes,  like  my  faith  in  an  ultimate 
meaning  of  existence,  is  in  constant  flux 
from  deep  to  tenuous. 

I  do  believe,  however,  that  making  the 
workplace  nicer,  giving  workers  more 
responsibility,  or  otherwise  changing  the 


organization  of  labor  in  the  office  or 
factory,  will  not  make  our  jobs  any  less 
alienating.  For  it  is  capitalism  itself  and  its 
reduction  of  life  to  the  pursuit  of  profit  that 
is  the  cause  of  our  dissatisfaction. 

A  case  in  point:  I  worked  as  a  temp  in  the 
human  resources  department  of  a  large, 
publically  controlled,  utility.  A  resource, 
according  to  the  O.E.D.  is  "a  means  of 
supplying  some  want  or  deficiency;  a  stock 
or  reserve  upon  which  one  can  draw  when 
necessary."  In  business  and  government, 
it  is  the  common  denominator  by  which  our 
destinies  as  human  beings  can  be  dealt 
with  "objectively"  in  the  manner  of  raw 
materials,  equipment,  and  financial  re- 
serves. The  lawyers  in  this  department 
keep  track  of  collective  bargaining  agree- 
ments in  other  industries  with  an  eye  to 
winning  concessions  with  its  unions  when 
their  contracts  expire.  The  department's 
actuaries  study  ways  of  reducing  retire- 
ment benefits.  The  lawyers  and  actuaries 
were  very  nice  people.  Sometimes,  at  my 
request,  they  even  let  me  work  at  home  for 
the  same  hourly  rate  as  if  I  were  in  the 
office. 

Of  course,  the  "bottom  line  uber  alles" 
is  what  makes  America  the  great  imperial 
power  it  is.  As  a  temp  working  in  the 
banks,  insurance  companies,  and  other 
institutions  of  that  ilk,  I  feel  like  I  am  a  foot 
soldier  in  the  occupying  army  of  the  large 
corporations  that  rule  the  free-world 
empire.  But  through  my  work  with 
Processed  World,  I  also  feel  like  a  member 
of  a  fifth  column  poised  to  sow  dissent, 
divulge  secrets,  or  otherwise  undermine 
the  corporate  structure.  I  do  not  think  there 
will  be  a  revolution,  or  a  strong  shift  in 
values,  in  my  life  time.  But  I  believe  it  is 
really  important  that  we  struggle  to 
maintain  our  humanity  in  the  face  of  wage 
slavery,  competition  for  jobs,  and  a  con- 
sumerist  culture  in  which  people  are 
measured  by  their  spending  power. 


PRIMITIVO  MORALES 

Stung  by  accusations  of  laziness,  I  push 
myself  to  my  writing  machine  and  start 
composing  an  answer  to  D.M. 

My  work  at  PW  is  not  alienated  — it  can 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


BJ)  I  c J) 
ID 


i 


II  um 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


be  tedious,  repetitive,  frustrating,  even 
hard.  But  it  is  not  alienated  in  any  real 
sense.  I  am  not  earning  money  for  some- 
body else  (save  very  indirectly  the  paper 
maker,  etc.),  and  I  am  not  helping  to  create 
some  power  above/outside  of  myself.  I  am 
doing  these  activities  so  that  I  may  have 
more  contact  with  people,  so  that  more 
people  can  find  some  forum  for  their  ideas. 
The  end  product,  the  magazine,  is  not  a 
commodity  in  the  sense  that  we  produce  it 
to  earn  money.  If  I  had  to  collate  pages,  or 
worse  yet,  run  them  through  the  folding 
machine,  8  hours  a  day  for  General  Amal- 
gamated Inc.,  that  would  be  alienated 
labor,  even  if  I  liked/used/needed  the  end 
product.  There's  such  a  thing  as  too  much 
of  a  good  thing  — the  only  activity  I  like  to 
engage  in  for  8  uninterrupted  hours  is 
sleep.  The  odious  tasks  are  relatively  short- 
lived and  scarce  because  of  our  schedule. 
We  all  share  in  the  needed  labors,  but  they 
aren't  an  everyday  problem. 

Are  we  a  model  for  other  organizations 
and  enterprises?  No.  .  .  not  really,  because 
we  are  a  few  volunteers  doing  something 
spread  over  a  long  period  of  time.  Clearly 
our  form  couldn't  work  for  a  project  which 
needs  to  work  continuously  such  as  a 
women's  health  center,  or  an  organizing 
office. 

Do  we  have  a  model  we  look  to?  Not 
really  .  .  .  most  of  us  have  been  in  other 
groups,  each  with  their  own  ways.  We  try 
to  come  up  with  a  structure  that  answers 
the  needs  of  production  and  the  needs  of 
the  personnel.  We're  certainly  not  an 
imitation  of  the  Spanish  anarchists,  the 
RCP,  some  industrial  management  clown, 
or  somebody's  school. 

I  advocate  sabotage  (on-the-job  direct 
action) ;  not  for  everybody  —  if  you  get  along 
well  with  your  work  situation,  aren't  being 
ripped  off,  and  aren't  producing  lethal 
"goods,"  then  there's  no  point.  But  most 
of  us  have  had,  or  will  have,  a  job  where  we 
are  being  robbed:  of  time,  money,  respect 
.  .  .  some  thing  or  quality.  This  kind  of 
abuse  is  damaging.  Just  as  the  colonized 
may  come  to  identify  with  the  colonizer,  or 
the  oppressed  with  the  oppressor,  and  the 
censored  artist  comes  to  internalize  the 
censorship,  these  daily  and  minute  abra- 
sions grind  us  down.  For  me  sabotage  is 
one  way  of  striking  back,  of  saying  that  I 
am  real,  I  do  count,  and  I  am  not  entirely 
powerless.  My  boss  may  be  the  target,  or 
perhaps  some  defiler  of  the  land,  or  maybe 
some  military  creature.  The  result  may  not 
even  be  noticed,  but  /  know.  At  times  we 
are  in  places  where  collective  action  isn't 
possible  (because  of  isolation  or  repres- 
sion), yet  the  need  to  "intervene"  re- 
mains. The  greatest  sabotage  would  be  a 
reshaping  of  what  is  made,  and  how,  and 
by  whom.  We  are  not  there  yet,  maybe 
never  will  be  (that  bright  bright  nuclear 
flash  one  day),  but  even  petty  sabotage 
helps  us  maintain  morale,  and  helps  us  to 
wear  them  down  (yes,  Virginia,  there  is  an 


"us/them"  worldview  here).  It  may  actual- 
ly hurt  them  — as  when  the  USS  Ranger 
was  towed  back  to  port  because  some  sailor 
dumped  a  3'  monkey  wrench  into  the  main 
drive  gear  (how  many  Vietnamese  — and 
Americans  — lived  longer  because  that  ship 
wasn't  on  station?),  or  it  may  only  raise  the 
cost  of  doing  business. 

I've  never  believed  in  blueprints  for  the 
future  — we,  here  and  now,  cannot  know 
the  conditions  faced  by  others,  at  different 
points  in  time.  Generations  of  people  have 
written  on  the  subject  and  none  of  them 
have  really  predicted  what  we're  living  in 


now  (some  are  close,  but  none,  of  course, 
are  accurate).  Nor  is  it  for  me/us  to 
prescribe  for  others  — if  a  person's  imagi- 
nation is  so  limited  that  they  can't  conjure 
up  a  better  world,  maybe  even  with  a  few 
concrete  ideas,  then  I  feel  sorry  for  them. 
Me,  I  get  too  embarrassed  to  talk  of  my 
hopes  for  a  day  that  will  probably  only 
come  long  after  I've  been  recycled.  Nor  do 
I  think  that  describing  the  Emerald  City 
will  give  us  a  better  idea  of  where  to  put 
our  feet  next  in  order  to  get  there.  But 
maybe  I'm  wrong. 

How  to  create  an  alternative.    .    .    the 


Joe  Schwind 
PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


question  with  no  dollar  value.  It  will  not  be 
answered  by  theoreticians  but  by  people, 
'de  base'  (grass  roots)  actually  finding 
answers  in  the  course  of  their  (changing) 
lives.  1  offer  no  final  answers,  no  ultimate 
truths,  no  perfect  Utopias,  only  a  grim 
knowledge  that  things  cannot  continue  as 
they  are  or  all  is  lost,  and  a  hope  that 
someday  all  of  us  can  answer  "What  do  we 
want  to  do  today?" 

•1«  •!•  «1«  •!»  «I«  *1*  •!•  •!•  •^  *S«  Sl^  St*  St* 
•jfi  ij*  <J>  iji  <j»  ^9  •!»  •f»  ^»  •!•  •!•  »l»  •!• 


MED-0 

F.L.: 

Thanks  for  one  of  the  best  letters  yet 
criticizing  PW.  Like  D.M.'s  letter,  you  take 
us  to  task  for  not  developing  positive 
solutions  to  the  worldwide  misery  we  are 
part  of.  Actually  your  thoughtful  letter  is 
part  of  the  solution:  open  communication 
and  dialogue.  While  this  alone  won't 
change  a  damn  thing,  it  is  essential  for 
constructing  collective  actions  that  will. 

Your  statement  that  "Formulating  a  new 
social  structure  will  be  far  more  difficult 
than  finding  a  new  job!!"  is  right  on 
target.  Indeed,  it  will  require  millions  of 
Americans  to  locate  their  'identity'  and 
livelihood  outside  of  ani;  job  we  now 
conceive  of.  It  means  everyone  re- 
examining the  very  assumptions  behind 
what  we  do  everyday  and  questioning  the 
oppressive  habits  universally  assumed  to 
be  'necessary.'  Is  working  40  hours  a  week 
in  a  downtown  office  really  the  best  way  to 
'provide'  for  your  family?  Is  a  personal 
computer  'valuable'  if  its  manufacture 
requires  burning  out  the  eyes  of  young 
Malaysian  women  who  assemble  its  chips? 
If  income  level  shouldn't  determine  access 
to  resources,  what  should?  Intelligence? 
Artistic  talent?  Moral  character?  Com- 
munity activism? 

Perhaps  the  most  important  question  is 
the  following:  What  would  \;ou  do  on 
Monday;  morning  if  the  bulling  and  selling 
of  human  time  was  abolished?  I'd  try  to 
start  or  join  some  kind  of  affinity  group, 
collective,  union  or  'community'  to  discuss 
what  is  still  worth  doing  and  what  isn't. 
Now  is  that  wildly  Utopian  or  what?  Well, 
it's  a  lot  less  fantastical  than  PW  positing  a 
plan  or  model  for  everyone  to  follow. 

It's  on  the  issue  of  who's  responsible  for 
the  current  mess  we're  in  that  I  totally 
disagree  with  you.  You  see  "indiuidual 
insulation  and  abdication  of  responsibility 
as  the  source  of  the  problem.  I  don't.  If,  as 
you  state,  "authoritarian  structure  is  only 
symptomatic  of  the  real  problem"  (i.e.,  the 
symptom  of  individual  weaknesses)  then  1 
guess  mass  psychotherapy  is  all  we  need  to 
set  things  straight.  Perhaps  Rogerian  coun- 
seling is  the  solution  to  the  'inferiority 
complex'  of  black  South  Africans. 

It's  all  too  clear  that  the  primary  cause  of 


our  misery  is  international  capitalism,  both 
corporate  and  state  sponsored.  To  be  sure, 
most  of  us  (myself  included)  are  fucked-up 
and    need    to    undergo    significant    inter- 
personal changes.  In  particular,  changing 
the  patterns  of  patriarchy,  the  work  ethic, 
racism,   and   self-destructiveness  will   re- 
quire a  great  deal  of  individual  psycholo- 
gical work.  Yet,  as  with  all  social  matters,    ^ 
the    forces    of    change    are     interactive.     S 
Individual  consciousness  and  social  super-    " 
structure  dynamically  influence  each  other,    a 
But  it's  a  real  backward  step  (despite  its    S 
current   fashionability)    not   to   see    social     a. 
superstructure  as  having  primacy.  It  was 
the    structural    abolition    of    slavery    (not 
individual   strength    of   character    among 
slaves)  which  significantly  improved  con- 
ditions for  Blacks  after  the  Civil  War. 

Your  misguided  analysis  regarding  the 
primary  source  of  the  world's  problems  is 
perhaps  why  you  believe  "The  tyranny  of 
the  working  class  would  only  be  worse  than 
what  we  have  at  present."  Leaving  aside 
the  outmoded  labeling  (what  is  tyranny  of 
the  working  class  but  old  useless,  rhetoric?) , 
it's  absurdly  elitist  to  think  the  self- 
interest  of  a   tiny   minority   of   capitalist 

tabilitA  centrale 


FATTURE  DA  LIQUIOARE 


you  ^££,  THl^ 


SENEFlCIARtO 
(nofnir>ativo  completo  9  IndJrlzzo) 


30  MAG.  1985 


managers  makes  for  a  better  world  thar 
the  desires  of  the  vast  majority  who  now 
carry  out  their  dictates.  If  economically 
forced  labor  and  the  profit  motive  were 
eliminated  (highly  probably  if  working 
people  determined  the  organization  of 
society)  why  would  anyone  freely  choose  to 
manufacture  and  ship  carcinogenic  pesti- 
cides (banned  in  the  U.S.)  to  Third  World 
countries?  What  would  compel  you  to  build 
nuclear  bomb  components  and  sell  them  to 
Israel  in  order  for  them  to  be  re-sold  to 
South  Africa?  What  possible  incentive 
would  there  be  to  sit  in  front  of  a  VDT 
screen  8  hours  a  day  and  input  numbers  for 
Bank  of  America? 

Perhaps  if  workers  were  in  power  things 
would  be  more  bumbled  and  inefficient 
than  they  are  now.  (Although  I  doubt  if 
that's  really  possible.)  But  do  you  really 
think  the  living  conditions  for  most  people 
in  the  world  would  be  as  cruel  and  mur- 
derous as  they  are  now?  If  you  recoil  from 
the  thought  of  the  "means  of  production 
under  the  control  of  the  average  co-work- 
er, "  then  precisely  who  should  run  things? 
Techno-experts?  New  Age  management 
specialists?  Tom  Hayden  and  Jane  Fonda? 

It's  true  the  obsolete  notion  of  the 
'working  class'  won't  suffice  in  creating  a 
new  society  for  post-industrial  America. 
Throughout  the  past  decade  other  social 
movements  (anti-nuclear,  feminist,  envir- 
onmental, anti-apartheid,  etc.)  have  far 
surpassed  labor  in  actually  effecting  pro- 
gressive social  changij.  And  this  exposes  a 
profound  dilemma  for  American  radicals. 
While  the  ideology  of  'workers  as  a  class'  is 
pure  nostalgia  in  the  U.S.,  worker  solidar- 
ity is  absolutely  essential  for  creating  the 
positive  plans  you  wish  PW  would  formu- 
late. As  always,  workers  are  also  in  the 
best  position  to  halt  the  existing  machinery 
of  social  control.  Both  approaches  need  to 
happen  simultaneously. 

You  think  that  "destroying  capital  re- 
sources" is  merely  "pretending  we  will 
become  powerful."  Well,  conceptualizing 
and  popularizing  practical  solutions  may  be 
necessary,  but  it's  also  insufficient.  As 
with  Polish  Solidarity  in  1980,  the  most 
coherent  plan  to  equitably  and  freely 
organize  society  will  fail  unless  certain 
'capital  resources'  (like  the  military,  secret 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


police,  the  technology  of  surveillance,  etc.) 
are  thoroughly  undermined.  Most  existing 
'capital'  will  have  to  be  either  destroyed, 
paralyzed,  or  re-tooled  in  order  for  social 
life  to  democratically  transform  itself.  For 
the  moment  at  least,  the  real  power  gained 
from  subverting  capital  resources  pre- 
figures Utopian  solutions.  Otherwise  the 
most  likely  outcome  is  that  the  structure 
perpetuating  profit,  humans  as  commodi- 
ties, murder,  and  mutation  will  keep  spiral- 
ling on. 

Still,  it's  extremely  important  to  propa- 
gate concrete,  progressive  solutions  — if  for 
no  other  reason  than  to  spark  our  imagi- 
nations and  reverse  the  pervasive  hope- 
lessness characterizing  this  age  of  aliena- 
tion. F.L's  letter  makes  a  crucial  point: 
radical  libertarians  need  to  seriously 
discuss  the  possibility  of  a  social  "plan  that 
has  some  hope  of  providing  for  everyone 's 
livelihood  in  some  easy  to  comprehend 
fashion.  "  To  that  end,  please  send  us  your 
comments. 


^^  ^^#  ^3^  ^Z^  ^Sfi  ^9^  ^S^  *A*  %t#  *9^  ^5^  *9/^  *S^  %£# 

^%  #j%  #j%  «j%  ^*  #^  ^w^  *j*  *j*  #j%  ^%  •J*  •J*  #j* 


LUCIUS  CABINS 

I  strongly  disagree  that  we  should  be 
either  developing  a  blueprint  for  the 
reorganization  of  society  and  production, 
or  suggesting  how  to  manage  office  life  in 
the  here  and  now.  The  pursuit  of  a  specific 
plan  contradicts  a  basic  assumption  of  our 
perspective,  i.e.  that  social  life  should  be 
consciously  organized  by  ever^/one  (or  at 
least  everyone  who  wants  to  participate). 

However,  I  do  think  it's  worthwhile  to 
discuss  different  ideas  to  show  that  the 
way  things  are  is  not  the  only  way  it  could 
be.  Our  imaginations  can  and  should  be 
directed  toward  alternatives  that  people 
could  actually  begin  to  implement  in  the 
absence  of  the  innumerable  social  con- 
straints and  institutions  they  now  face. 
Social  change  is  inevitable;  the  direction  it 
takes  is  not.  Therefore  our  imagining 
avoids  religio/millenarian  assumptions 
that  suggest  sudden  and  total  social  trans- 
formation to  the  promised  land.  On  the 
other  hand,  we  must  posit  radical  changes 
in  people's  relationship  to  nature,  their 
work  and  each  other. 

It's  true  that  since  about  PW  *5  or  so  we 
have  avoided  explicit  tactical  advocacy. 
What  emerged,  by  default,  were  accounts 


of  individual  actions  for  emotional  and 
psychic  survival  in  the  office.  One  part  of 
this  is  anti-management  agitation,  another 
part  is  sabotage.  This  reflects  our  experi- 
ence that  most  people  are  not  involved  in 
collective  responses  to  the  modern  office. 
But  it  felt  different  when  the  magazine 
started.  At  that  time  (1980-81)  one  of  the 
largest  strikes  of  private  sector  office 
workers  in  recent  memory  was  taking  place 
(1500  workers  at  Blue  Shield  in  S.F.).  Our 
initial  interest  in  sabotage  and  related 
activities  was  developed  partly  in  response 
to  this  collective  context.  .  .  the  power  of 
the  workers  was  being  destroyed  by  the 
company  and  the  union.  A  return  to  direct 
action  would  have  given  them  much  more 
power  vis-a-vis  Blue  Shield.  Such  office 
occupation  and/or  seizure  of  precious  data 
is  obviously  illegal  under  labor  and 
criminal  law.  The  law  in  this  society  never 
sanctions  any  kind  of  real  power  for 
workers. 

But  what  if  human  beings  could  set  up 
something  different?  One  of  my  first 
concerns  coming  from  the  "office  con- 
text," would  be  to  answer  the  questions 
What  is  useful  information?  Useful  to 
whom?  And  for  what?  In  general,  the  only 
useful  information  in  such  a  society  would 
be  that  which  helps  people  coordinate  their 
activities  with  each  other,  and  to  communi- 
cate freely  among  themselves.  All  the 
information  now  collected  for  purposes  of 
money/property  exchange  and  social  con- 
trol—probably 60-80%  of  all  office  work 
—  could  be  abolished  and  no  one  would 
have  to  do  these  stupid  things. 

But  assuming  that  there  is  some  useful 
information  that  needs  to  be  handled  in  any 
society,  it  remains  to  be  decided  how  that 
work  should  be  organized.  Should  its 
"handling"  be  integrated  into  the  activi- 
ties it  refers  to,  or  should  it  be  maintained 
as  a  separate  "administrative"  function? 
In  either  case,  in  fact  in  any  given  "enter- 
prise" (a  group  of  humans  doing  some- 
thing together),  there  would  be  a  dif- 
ference of  decision-making  power  (as  yet 
undetermined)  between  those  who  stay 
and  take  a  lot  of  responsibility  and  put  a  lot 
of  their  lives  into  it,  and  those  who  are  just 
"passing  through"  for  a  month  or  a  year, 
trying  it  out.  This  in  turn  assumes  that  we 
are  discussing  a  society  in  which  indivi- 
duals have  an  unprecedented  amount  of 
freedom  to  move  around  and  do  different 
things,  and  not  to  get  locked  in  to  any  kind 


of  "career"  unless  they  so  desired.  The 
actual  decision-making  process  of  any 
given  group  should  be  established  by  those 
involved.  (Similarly  there  would  have  to  be 
an  agreed-upon  relationship  between  the 
particular  group  and  the  larger  community 
regarding  the  use  of  resources,  the  social 
utility  of  the  products,  and  the  effects  of 
the  activity  on  broader,  socially  agreed- 
upon  goals  and  purposes.) 

All  this  no  doubt  sounds  a  bit  "pie  in  the 
sky"  in  the  context  of  this  outrageously 
barbaric,  ultrahierarchical,  and  over- 
specialized  world.  How  might  such  ar- 
rangements come  about?  What  will  it  take 
to  break  through  the  inertia  and  amnesia 
that  leave  so  many  people  feeling  afraid  of 
change  instead  of  passionately  committed 
to  it?  No  small  group  or  publication  can 
possibly  change  this  situation  by  itself. 
Then  again,  we  must  try  for  our  own  sakes 
if  for  no  other  reason.  And  if  we  try,  and 
others  try  other  things,  then  eventually  a 
social  movement  with  exciting  possibilities 
may  erupt. 

The  crux  of  a  new  social  movement,  in 
my  opinion,  should  revolve  around  what  we 
do,  and  Luhy  we  do  it.  This  means  that 
people  begin  to  seriously  examine  what 
they  do  every  day  for  money,  and  why.  As 
the  answers  become  clear,  changes  in  our 
willingness  to  go  on,  as  well  as  changes  in 
how  we  define  what  we  "need,"  seem 
inevitable.  In  essence  this  means  a  return 
to  individual  subjectivity,  combined  with 
an  awareness  that  human  freedom  is  found 
in  cooperation,  in  a  society  freed  from 
coercive  social  institutions  like  money/ 
wage-labor,  national  frontiers,  hierarchical 
power,  corporations,  etc.  Processed  World 
contributes  to  this  general  goal  insofar  as 
we  challenge  these  basic  institutions  that 
so  many  take  for  granted,  and  insofar  as  we 
raise  doubts  about  the  value  or  purpose  of 
the  majority  of  work  done.  Our  Letters  and 
Tales  of  Toil  feature  "average  folks"  [like 
ourselves]  talking  about  their  situations; 
this  contributes  to  a  return  to  subjective 
sensibilities  crucial  to  the  larger  changes 
we  are  interested  in. 

We  make  no  claims  to  having  the 
answers,  and  we  don't  want  to  be  just  a 
"bitching  and  moaning"  'zine.  But  we  also 
don't  want  to  get  caught  in  a  "realistic" 
politics  that  force  one  to  a  polici^  of 
social  reform  as  the  best  we  can  hope  for. 
In  fact  social  reform  is  profoundly  unrealis- 
tic,   because    radical    change    is    needed 


socoosooccccccccccccoocccccccoccccccoccccooocooccocoooGeooccosooeoGoocooooccoeoscccecco^ 

■^COMPUTERS 

SCOGCCOOSOOOOOeOOOOOOOOOOOQCOOGOQOSOQOCCCOCOOCOQOSCOOCCCOaOOOGOOCOeCCCCCOOOCCOOCCGCCCiCOOSCO 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


urgentli/  to  reverse  the  destruction  of  the 
planet  and  prevent  mass  human  starva- 
tion/war/poisoning etc.  Our  freedom  and 
happiness  (and  possibly  survival)  are  depen- 
dent on  revolutionary  changes  in  daily  life 
that  depart  from  every  model  or  social 
system  created  in  the  past  few  hundred 
years.  We  are  in  a  unique  position  histori- 
cally, materially,  and  psychologically.  Our 
solutions  must  reflect  this.  They  must  not 
be  predetermined  by  those  who  believe 
they  are  "in  the  know,"  but  should  evolve 
as  people  grapple  with  the  enormously 
complex  and  difficult  questions  that  I  have 
only  barely  touched  on  in  this  short  letter. 
Thanks  to  D.M.  and  F.L.  for  writing.  We 
hope  this  dialogue  continues  and  urge 
other  readers  to  send  in  their  own  ideas/ 
rebuttals/expansions,  etc. 


I«*»-««»»«»-g»»-»  ■»»■«  ■»»»■»»! 


wiim!f^mmfm'////y^y/////yy//////////jm'^^^^^^ 


Oh  Gosh!  Another  Day! 
v/////////////////////////^^^^^  I  LOVE  my  alarm  clock! 


LOUIS  MICHAELSON 

F.L.  states  that  "people  have  insulated 
themselves  from  one  another  and  have 
personally  abdicated  any  responsibility  for 
the  world."  This  is  blaming  the  victim, 
arguably  the  cornerstone  of  the  American 
ideology  (flipside;  anyone  can  succeed  by 
their  own  talent  and  efforts).  Yet  there  is  a 
core  of  truth  to  it.  The  real  meaning  of  the 
much-abused  term  "alienation"  is  that 
people  trade  (alienate)  their  control  over 
much  of  their  social  activity,  i.e.  their 
work,  in  exchange  for  money.  In  a  sense 
this  is  indeed  an  "abdication  of  respon- 
sibility"—but  one  enforced  by  the  whole 
existing  society  and  its  ideology.  Each 
individual  is  confronted  with  a  choice:  sell 
their  work-time  to  a  company  or  govern- 
ment (directly  as  an  employee,  indirectly 
as  a  craftperson  or  retailer);  or  face  what- 
ever their  nation  does  to  the  jobless 
(welfare,  starvation,  jail).  Collectively, 
their  sold  or  alienated  work  — producing 
merchandise  in  factories,  circulating  mon- 
ey and  data  in  offices,  performing  services 
in  restaurants,  etc.  — recreates  every  day 
the  horrendous  world  we  live  in.  At  the 
positive  pole  of  this  vast  flow  of  human 
time  and  energy  are  the  top  owner-mana- 
gers of  business  and  government.  But  they 
too  are  largely  constrained  by  the  laws  of 
the  world  market  and  the  web  of  institu- 
tions, states  and  power-blocs.  The  collec- 
tive entity  known  as  "Ronald  Reagan,"  for 
instance,  cannot  simply  nuke  the  USSR  or 
Lebanon,  much  as  he/it  would  like  to;  nor 
can  General  Motors  make  just  any  vehicles 
it  pleases  and  charge  whatever  price, 
because  like  all  businesses  it  must  compete 
and  profit  in  order  to  survive. 

The  result  is  that  all  of  us,  from  the 
highest  to  the  lowest,  unwittingly  repro- 
duce a  society  over  which  we  have  no 
control,  and  which  is  destroying  us  and 
planet.    Its   masters   (and  occasional  mis- 


tresses) are  the  least  likely  to  contest  it;  not 
only  are  they  the  best  protected  from  its 
ravages,  but  they  are  its  super-slaves,  who 
have  saturated  themselves  with  its  values 
in  order  to  succeed  on  its  terms.  Con- 
versely, those  most  likely  to  transform  the 
present  world  are  those  with  the  least 
personal  stake  in  it  and  the  most  collective 
power  to  destroy  it.  By  and  large  this 
means  neither  the  professionals  (too  com- 
fortable) nor  the  desperately  non-employed 
poor  (too  powerless).  It  can  only  mean  the 
ordinary  routine  workers,  whether  clerical, 
industrial  or  service.  One  of  the  most  care- 
fully suppressed  facts  of  modern  history  is 
that  just  such  people  — not  "great  think- 
ers" like  Marx  — inuented  socialism/com- 
munism/anarchism nearly  two  hundred 
years  ago.  They  have  also  devised  in 
practice  a  host  of  new  kinds  of  libertarian 
social  forms  — committees  of  correspon- 
dence, neighborhood  clubs,  factory  com- 
mittees, cooperatives,  "parliaments  of  the 
streets,"  independent  unions.  Solidarities. 
Even  in  the  U.S.  Even  now,  here  and  there. 
There's  no  need  to  fear  working-class 
power.  It  is  precisely  in  coming  together  to 
exercise  such  power  that  the  "stupid, 
bigoted  brutal"  workers  shed  their  stupid- 
ity, bigotry  and  brutality  — the  psycholo- 
gical and  cultural  byproducts  of  slavery  — 
and  begin  thinking  and  acting  in  new  ways. 
The  Civil  Rights  movement,  one  of  the 
largest  recent  exercises  of  working-class 
power  in  this  country  (who  did  most  of  the 
sitting-in,  boycotting,  striking,  marching, 
but  workers  and  their  children?)  resulted  in 
a  50%  drop  in  violent  crime  throughout  the 
South  while  it  lasted.  In  the  Seattle  General 
Strike  of  1919,  the  workers  ran  that  city 
(including  communal  kitchens  and  laun- 
dries) for  a  week.  They  made  a  rough 
port-and-timber  town  so  peaceful  that  it 
could  be  successfully  policed  by  unarmed 
workingmen.  What  we  should  fear  is  the 
power  of  political  bureaucrats  and  "revolu- 


tionary intellectuals"  acting  in  the  people's 
name,  colonizing  their  organs  of  decision 
and  action,  dominating  their  debates, 
leeching  the  power  out  of  their  hands  in  the 
name  of  "efficiency"  and  "discipline."  It 
is  that  power,  not  workers'  power,  we  see 
in  the  monstrosity  usually  called  socialism 
or  communism. 

Which  brings  us  to  the  question  of 
Utopia.  Marx  and  other  genuine  revolu- 
tionaries of  the  nineteenth  century  opposed 
utopianism  because  they  understood  that 
the  new  society  would  (as  other  PWers 
have  pointed  out  here)  be  the  collective 
creation  of  countless  people  acting  unfore- 
seeably.  For  reasons  much  too  complex  to 
go  into  here,  the  old  workers'  movement 
these  revolutionaries  were  part  of  failed, 
and  the  capitalist-statist  system  tri- 
umphed. In  the  process,  it  managed  to  cut 
off  the  working  people  of  the  developed 
countries  not  only  from  the  more  radical 
moments  of  their  own  history,  but  from  any 
different  kind  of  life-experience  or  set  of 
values  against  which  the  system's  could  be 
measured  (e.g.  the  tribe,  the  farming 
village).  The  system  came  to  surround  us 
on  all  sides,  largely  dominating  language, 
imagination,  thought.  For  this  reason,  I 
believe  that  Utopian  thinking  — the  sus- 
tained effort  to  imagine  another  human 
world  without  hierarchical  power,  national 
frontiers,  patriarchy,  or  the  exploitation  of 
people  or  nature  — has  become  essential  for 
radical  change. 

Fortunately,  the  system  remains  contra- 
dictory, continually  impelling  people  to 
rebel  against  various  aspects  of  itself.  Such 
rebellion  ranges  from  tiny,  invisible  every- 
day revolts  like  go-slows,  sabotage  and 
absenteeism,  through  strikes,  demonstra- 
tions, large-scale  civil  disobedience  and 
direct  action,  to  movements  like  those  in 
Poland  in  1980-81  or  South  Africa  today. 
True,  all  but  the  largest  and  most  coherent 
of  these   revolts   tend   either   to   subside 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


without  leaving  any  significant  trace,  or 
else  (as  to  some  extent  with  the  Civil 
Rights,  women's,  gay,  ecology  and  peace 
movements)  to  become  mere  feedback 
loops  by  which  the  system  corrects  itself. 
On  the  other  hand,  any  real  social  struggle, 
however  small,  provides  a  chance  for 
people  to  experience  at  first  hand  the 
voluntary  cooperation,  solidarity,  open 
debate  and  collective  decision-making  on 
which  (I  believe)  the  new  society  must  be 
based.  Only  such  experience  can  break  the 
barriers  of  isolation  imposed  by  the  work- 
for-pay  system  and  its  corollaries  — the 
single-family  home,  the  shrivelling  of  com- 
munity, the  rule  of  the  mass  media.  Only 
such  experience  can  make  Utopia  more 
than  wistful  dreaming  for  the  many,  by 
opening  cracks  in  the  smooth  facade  of  the 
system's  assumptions.  F.L.'s  "information 
networks"  are  very  much  a  part  of  this 
process  — PW  is  one  such,  but  we  need 
plenty  more,  in  preparation  for  the  unpre- 
dictable day  when  social  crisis  may  break 
out  once  again  (in  1958,  could  anyone  have 
foreseen  1968?).  We  also  need  Utopian 
imagining,  without  which  the  new  oppo- 
sition will  fall  short  or  get  lost.  The  French 
critic  Michel  Abensour  said  it  best:  "The 
proper  function  of  Utopia  is  the  education 
of  desire." 


■■g-g-g-g^^^-g  «g  g«  mmww  ggg  ■  I 


PAXA LOURDE 

1  would  like  to  repeat  the  point  that 
Processed  World  is  a  small  group  of  people 
who  can't  begin  to  draw  a  definitive  master 
plan  for  social  change.  The  world  has  had 
enough  small  groups  that  try  to  dictate  for 
everybody  a  way  of  life,  a  religion,  an 
economic  system,  a  hemline. 

However,  I  do  think  that  PW  could  talk 
more  about  concrete  ways  of  getting  over. 
As  a  regular  temporary  office  worker,  I 
often  find  myself  isolated,  struggling  to 
find  a  way  to  maintain  my  self-respect, 
energy  and  at  the  same  time  strike  a  blow 
against  the  man.  It's  hard.  I  have  found 
that  petty  acts  of  sabotage  work  wonders  in 
preserving  some  sense  of  social  distance 
and  creative  rebellion.  Still,  I  find  sabotage 
conflicts  with  wanting  to  do  a  'good  job'  just 
to  make  the  work  interesting  (internalized 
Protestant  ethic?).  One  solution  is  to  make 
it  all  like  building  sand  castles.  I  absorb 
myself  in  mundane  tasks  only  to  delight  in 
their  eventual  destruction.  But  even  this 
becomes  boring  and  lifeless  after  a  while 
and  I  long  for  real  creativity. 

I  have  thought  about  really  organizing  an 
office.  But  over  what  kinds  of  issues? 
Health  and  safety  stuff  work  well  and  I 
have  had  moderate  success  in.  raising 
awareness  of  the  danger  of  VDTs,  photo- 
copy machine  fumes,  stress,  and  so  forth. 
But  this  emphasis  is  obviously  limited  and 


only  barely  begins  to  tackle  the  deeper 
issues  of  social  control  and  utility.  What 
sort  of  workplaces  are  organizable?  Most 
workers  realize  that  the  agents  of  out- 
spoken rebellion  will  almost  certainly  find 
themselves  flat-ass  on  the  pavement, 
having  accomplished  jackshit.  This  coun- 
try's labor  laws  and  labor  unions  continue 
to  be  sorrier  and  sorrier  jokes.  Workers 
councils  can  be  effective.  My  idea  of 
councils  is  pretty  informal.  I  envision 
workers  ignoring  official  hierarchical  struc- 
tures and  just  getting  together  outside  of 
the  workplace  at  a  local  bar  or  cafe  to  talk 
about  different  ways  to  organize  produc- 
tion or  pressure  the  boss.  The  place  I  am 
working  at  now  has  a  structure  like  this  in 
place.  It  works  pretty  well,  but  funny,  it  is 
male  dominated  and  as  a  result  of  its  clan- 
destineness,  undemocratic. 

But  is  worrying  about  'how  to  organize'  a 
way  of  ignoring  the  forms  of  resistance  that 
already  exist  in  most  offices?  Most  places  I 
find  myself  in  have  elaborate  gossip  net- 
works, stiff  etiquette  of  relations  between 
supervisors  and  their  charges,  clear  recog- 
nition of  varying  capabilities  and  toleran- 
ces among  the  workers.  Simply  describing 
all  of  this  is  an  important  project.  It  is  clear 
that  organizational  models  developed  for 
19th  and  early  20th  century  industrial  shop 
floors  are  unsuitable  for  contemporary 
offices  and  robotized  factories.  If  we  are  to 
develop  effective  models,  we  need  to  pay 
attention  to  what  is  actually  happening.  My 
disappointment  with  PW  is  that  we  don't 
do  more  of  this. 

One  last  comment  — I  don't  believe  in 
privileging  workplace  politics.  Other  issues 
(peace,  racism,  ecology,  feminism...)  moti- 
vate some  people  more  than  dealing  with 
some  bullshit  job.  I  guess  all  you  can  do  is 
pick  up  the  pieces  where  you  find  them. 

Hello  there...  ^^ 

I  love  to  cook  and  act  in  the  theatre  and 
ride  my  bike  a  great  deal  and  I  write  poetry 
and  I  work  in  an  office  downtown. 

I  was  introduced  to  Processed  World  by 
a  cynical  body-builder.  She's  also  my  boss. 
I  work  under  the  table  for  the  US  Court: 
isn't  that  ironic?  Isn't  that  typical? 

I  like  working  here  because  I  can  talk 
dirty  to  my  boss,  because  I  don't  have  to 
comb  my  hair,  because  every  once  in  a 
while  I  get  to  drink  a  beer  while  I  busily 
type  away,  because  I  get  to  watch  the  bums 
outside  the  window  rummage  through  the 
garbage.  You  see,  our  office  has  a  locked 
door  and  a  mirrored  glaze  on  the  window. 
We  can  see  out...  but  they  can't  see  in.  It 
clarifies  perspective,  and  when  you  know 
where  you  are  it  makes  observation  valid. 

Enclosed    are    some    observations    I've 


made  about  the  processed  world  with 
which  we  are  intrinsically  entombed,  about 
the  processed  food  we  suck,  about  the 
processed  art  we  buy,  about  the  processed 
airwaves  that  tiptoe  and  then  pounce  on  us 
from  boxes  of  all  shapes  and  sizes. 

I'll  be  watching  from  behind  my  office 
window.  I'll  be  eating  a  carry-out  sand- 
wich. I'll  sing  in  any  color  I  please.  I'll 
insult  corporate  whores  and  big  business 
bozoes. 

Your  toy  and  mine, 
M.Q.  —Tucson,  AZ 


mmtmifim^mitmumKmgmmm 


PW, 

Here  I  sit  in  a  classroom  in  a  high  school 
in  suburbia.  The  students  are  having  a 
discussion,  defying  the  teacher's  quest  for 
control  (how  rebellious  of  them!). 

The  height  of  the  conversation  is  a  new 
situation  comedy  and  confessions  of  what 
was  watched  on  TV  last  night.  They  have 
memorized  a  day  by  day  account  of  what's 
on,  when,  what  channel,  and  of  course  a 
full  knowledge  (and  belief,  I  almost  like  to 
think)  of  fictional  happenings  on  the  tube. 

This  happens  every  day  here  in  Subur- 
bia. What  has  happened  to  what  was 
supposed  to  be  a  free  thinking  country, 
political  awareness,  intelligence,  and  just 
plain   intellectualism?    Why    aren't    these 


10 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


kids   discussing   their   futures,    their    feel- 
ings? 

Most  of  these  people  are  going  to  be 
living  in  suburbia  all  their  lives.  It  is 
incorporated  into  their  minds  that  the 
socially  accepted  ideal,  success,  is  to:  get 
married,  get  a  well-paying  job,  buy  a  house 
in  suburbia,  and  have  children. 

What  commonly  happens  in  result  is: 
divorce,  a  job  they  hate,  a  house  in  subur- 
bia, out  of  control  children.  And  of  course 
the  Television  God. 

TV  sets  ideals  for  these  sheep.  It  is  far 
more  corrupting  than  it  is  educating.  I 
suppose  it's  not  what  you  watch,  but  how 
you  watch  it. 

Donna  the  Dead  — Concord,  CA 


^^^^^^^^^^^ 


Fellow  Button  Pushers, 

Having  been  a  programming  denizen  of 
the  processor  world  for  eight  years  and 
being  more  prone  to  bohemian  life  than 
that  of  a  three  piece  suit.  Burberry  trench- 
coat  and  condo.  Processed  World  is  a  wel- 
come alternative  to  the  blind  acceptance  of 
computers  by  the  popular  press.  I  got  into 
the  computer  field  basically  by  the  back 
door.  My  first  job  with  computers  was  in 
work/study  in  college.  All  work  no  study, 
keypunching  maintenance  requests  for 
plugged  toilets  cracked  casements,  and 
decollating  three  part  forms.  The  education 
began  when  the  twitching  DP  director 
wanted  me  to  phoney  up  some  statistics  for 
him  to  present  to  who  knows  what  com- 
mittee. The  relationship  deteriorated  after 
I  refused.  As  a  graduate  student  in 
Education  I  rapidly  learned  that  most 
people  were  not  only  totally  ignorant  of 
what  a  computer  actually  did  but  were 
afraid  of  it  as  well.  Educational  research 
types  are  in  love  with  numbers.  Feel  it 
lends  a  scientific  validity  to  their  mumb- 
lings, I  guess.  At  any  rate  I  was  able  to  pay 
for  peanut  butter  with  the  money  I  made 
analyzing  dissertation  data,  professor's 
research  data,  and  doing  some  general 
purpose  learning  simulation  of  the  admis- 
sion policy  of  the  university.  The  goal  was 
essentially  to  find  out  if  they  could  accept  a 
lesser  grade  of  student  who  had  more 
Money  and  still  maintain  a  good  public 
image  relative  to  the  sex,  race,  creed  and 
national  origin  demographics  of  the  stu- 
dent body.  Raygun  had  just  been  elected 
and  they  could  see  the  student  finance 
programs  dying  on  the  vine.  Rationalizith 
the  Dean  "Economic  success  is  the  best 
indicator  of  intelligence."  (Or  marrying 
into  the  right  family  eh  old  man?) 

Having  fled  again  I  find  myself  program- 
ming for  the  business  world,  awful 
automation,  systems  to  count  beans, 
menus,   masks,    screens   of  whatever  you 

PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


care  to  call  them  for  customer  service 
personnel  to  stare  into  all  day.  Meaning 
less  financial  reports  that  everyone  admits 
they  never  look  at.  (Then  why  are  you 
paying  me  to  write  it?). 

One  of  the  Mismanagement  trade 
papers  had  a  piece  about  Jack  Kilby,  "who 
invented  the  integrated  circuit  in  1958... 
confesses  he  just  never  thought  of  all  the 
uses  for  the  IC  but  he  did  know  it  was  an 
important  discovery.  "  No  Jack,  I'll  bet  you 
never  did. 

Fassl  — Chicago 


y////^v//<v:'r/-9y/w//////////m^^^^ 


Dear  Processed  World, 

What  the  bloody  hell?!  Thought  I  would 
drop  you  people  a  few  lines!  I'm  still  a 
prisoner  in  the  Missouri  Dept.  of  Cor- 
rections! I'll  inform  (you)  when  I  get 
released.  Which  will  be  Oct.,  1986! 
Goddamn  I'm  looking  forward  to  getting 
out  and  finding  me  a  J.O.B.!  The  parole 
board  wasn't  impressed  when  I  answered 
the  question:  "What  are  your  plans  if  you 
were  released  today?"  Answer:  "Oh...  I'll 
get  a  part-time  job  and  go  fishing  every 
summer  and  I  have  a  friend  who—"  "We 
see  here  in  your  file  that  you  have  never 
held  a  job  for  a  period  any  longer  than  four 
months.  Why  is  that?  "  I  could  have  easily 
answered  something  like:  "It's  none  of 
your  business,  frog  brain!  "  I'm  compas- 
sionate though!  Instead,  I  said:  "Well,  I  do 
a  lot  of  traveling,  see."  I  knew  though  that 
none  of  them  "saw,"  so  what  the  bloody 
hell?  I  like  PW  probably  too  much.  No 
really!  I'm  impressed  with  the  letters  you 
print,  and  the  stories  are  great!  I  was  once 
a  salesman  for  a  rip-off  chemical  company. 
If  anyone  needs  info  on  how  to  lie,  cheat, 
and  steal  hard  earned  greenbacks  from 
gullible  folks,  then  baby  I  can  open  your 
grey-cells  up  to  an  enlightened  level  that 
will  blow  your  crapping  mind!  Don't  get 
me  wrong,  huh?!  I've  got  a  conscience! 
That's  why  I'm  a  poor  bumming  anarchist! 
I'm  the  lowest  class  bum  there  is!  If  by 
chance  there  is  even  a  lower  class  bum 
even  lower  or  just  as  low  as  me,  then  you 
can't  rest  easy  knowing  that  something 
somewhere  is  about  to  come  unglued;  and 
I'm  not  speaking  of  "red-baiting"  either 
buddy!!! 

An  Anarchist  to  Death!  —  S.S.  — MO 

Sometimes  things  don't  go  the  way  you 
want  them  to.  Sometimes  things  never 
"go."  If  you've  ever  been  bored  then  you 
know  how  I  feel  right  now.  Sitting  around 
doing  nothing  at  all  except  being  bored. 
This  bored  life  is  really  a  drag. 


I  really  don't  like  being  bored.  Some- 
times though  — if  this  seems  ironic  — I'd 
rather  be  bored  than  work  at  a  job.  This 
may  sound  anti-social,  but  I'm  bored  and  I 
don't  have  much  else  to  speculate  on. 
Except,  being  bored.  And  this  is  a  drag. 

I  can  think  of  a  million  things  I  could  be 
doing  right  now,  but  I'm  in  prison  and  I 
can't  do  those  things  I  would  really  want 
to  do.  Then  again,  I'm  so  bored  I  probably 
wouldn't  even  do  "those  things"  I  can 
think  of  to  do  to  better  pass  my  time. 

I'm  bored.  I'm  very  bored.  I'm  almost 
sick  with  boredom.  There  should  be  a  law 
against  boredom.  That  way  we  never  could 
be  bored,  unless  we  got  so  bored  that  we 
couldn't  help  ourselves  from  being  bored 
and  then  be  sent  to  jail  to  get  even  more 
bored. 

I  won't  always  stay  bored.  But  I'm  bored 
now,  and  that  is  the  way  it  is.  I've  been 
bored  for  months.  Maybe  tomorrow  I  won't 
be  bored.  But  who  can  say?  I'm  bored  now; 
I've  been  bored;  and  chances  are  I'll  be 
bored  until  I  am  no  longer  bored. 

FromSomeone  Who  is  Bored  — S.S.,  MO 


Dear  PW, 

Your  publication  is  dynamite!  I  very 
much  enjoyed  reading  issue  13...  I'd  like  to 
submit  a  biting,  colorful,  cynical,  rehash- 
of-reality  of  how  I  obtained  SSI  at  age  33 
(1982)  and  the  facts  thereof.  I  love  to  write. 
(I  should  be  writing  my  book  (about  pros- 
titution and  my  personal  experiences/ad- 
ventures) that  I  began  in  '81,  the  same  year 
I  applied  for  SSI...)  So  many  everyday 
insanities/realities/myths  to  contend  with 
moment  by  moment!  Your  writers  in  issue 
13  echo  and  magnify  what  countless  of  us 
feel/see/hear/think/experience!  Yeah,  I 
was  blown  away...  I'm  36  now...  often  wish 
I  was  an  innocent-arrogant  22  again.. some- 
times feel  like  I'm  50. ..live  by  myself  but 
not  alone  in  a  H.U.D.  project  which  of 
course  is  pseudo-socialized  housing  for  the 
"low-income"  — a  nice  term  for  POOR, 
disenfranchised  people  on  the  edges  of  the 
mainstream. 

What  it  all  comes  down  to  is  that  there's 
simply  too  many  damn  people  in  our 
country  and  the  world!  (I  had  a  tubal 
ligation  by  choice  in  '73!)  This  violent- 
insane  country-society  is  experiencing  and 
manifesting  the  affects  of  a  population 
explosion  that's  been  exploding  for  30 
years!!  You  know  there's  too  many  damn 
OVER  BREEDERS!  I've  been  erotically 
intimate  with;  sucked  cocks  of,  played 
with,  danced  with,  talked  with,  socialized 
with  numerous  people  of  many  races  and 
nationalities,  of  both  sexes.  I'm  an  atheist 
with  Buddhist  leanings  — but  damn-it-to- 
hell!  ALL  the  races  are  creating/repro- 
ducing too  many  other  humans!  I'm  sick  of 
self  righteous-nazi-dykes  and  others  with 


11 


white-liberal-guilt  asserting  that  we're  all 
racist!  It  all  boils  down  to  this  economic 
system  of  capitalism  and  so-called  Christi- 
anity! Religious  hype-tripe-crap  that's 
spread  and  spread  into  a  huge,  over- 
whelming cancer  all  over  this  planet! 

By  the  way. ..this  is  "recycled"  paper.  I 
like  to  at  least  help  save  TREES,  as  well  as 
money,  spent  on  xeroxing  and  typing- 
paper  sheets.  I  also  like  to  share  the  stuff 
printed  on  the  back  of  my  letters...  (I  had  a 
C.E.T.A.  job  at  our  recycling  center.  I 
loved  it.  After  4  months,  of  course,  A^O  job. 
End  of  contract  for  this  kind  of  "subsidized 
slavery" —/ree  workers  for  organizations 
who  have  to  beg  &  cry  for  funding.) 
Since  I  receive  a  few  crumbs  from  the 
gov't,  each  month  to  survive  on  and  pinch 
my  pennies  for  my  obsession-passion  for 
taking  pictures,  experiencing  photography, 
capturing  reality  in  an  image  of  my  own 
creation.  I  wish,  if  I  had  a  hot-shot  job  and 
a  good-car,  I  could  zoom  up  to  S.F.  and 
share  in  your  socializing  and  talks  and  visit 
you  people.  (You're  more  than  welcome  to 
call  me  &  come  visit  Sanity-Cruz  and  let  me 
take  you  on  a  surrealistic-tour!)  (Really!  No 
shit!)  We've  become  a  miniature-Manhat- 
tan of  sorts.  With  a  county,  (growing),  of 
"only"  200,500  or  so,  we've  got  about  one 
of  everything  that  exists  in  a  metropolis 
including  one  "dirty"  book  store;  one 
"gay  "  bar,  and  one  ghetto.  Used  to  have  a 
dirty-movie-porno-theatre.  The  owner  who 
lived  in  San  Mateo  with  2  wives,  five  cars, 
three  other  porno-theatres,  got  chased  out 
of  here  by  legal-petition  means  and  the 
fire  marshall.  I  WORKED  as  a  cashier  & 


photo:  Rachel  Johnson 

answered  telephones  at  the  dirty-movie 
place.. for  about  a  month.  I  wrote  a  great- 
eye-opening  article  about  the  job-place. 
(Didn't  get  paid...  it  was  in  a  weekly  "al- 
ternative," poor-post-hippie-newspaper). 
I've  had  incredible  adventure/misadven- 
tures in  trying  to  'fit'— to  do  a  job,  be 
employed  in  "straight"  day  to  day  occu- 
pations... Are  you  interested?  You're  not  a 
tight-mostly-fraternity-of-editors- writers, 
are  you?  I'm  also  a  compassionate, 
sensitive,  affectionate,  curious  individual 
who  shares  concerns  with  all  kinds  of 
people,  including  my  2  cats  and  my 
overbreeding  neighbors. 

Sincerely  &  frighteningly  yours, 
A.S.  —Santa  Cruz,  CA 
P.S.  I  cheered  &  smirked  at  the  Kelly-Girl 
Klone  article!!  My  hobbies  are:  smoking 
cigarettes  &  masturbating  &  biting  my 
nails. 


SCCCCCOGOCCCCCOGOSOCOOCCOOOOC 


Dear  PW, 

During  the  past  two  and  a  half  years  I 
have  been  working  in  San  Francisco  as  a 
clerk,  secretary,  receptionist,  and  technical 
assistant.  I  am  a  male  who  is  married  and 
have  one  child  who  is  now  15  months  of 
age.  It  is  from  this  San  Francisco  office 
experience  that  I  have  come  to  understand 
the  meaning  of  wage-slavery  and  its  effects 
on  the  joys  of  parenting  in  this  processed 
world. 

During   the   first    three   months   of  our 


child's  life  both  my  wife  and  I  were  at 
home.  That  was  a  truly  joyful  time  despite 
the  fact  of  depending  solely  on  unemploy 
ment  benefits.  The  household  work  did  not 
interfere  with  parenting,  like  the  9-to-5 
work-a-day-worid  does,  mainly  because 
housework  did  not  deny  the  desire  to  be 
with  my  family.  But  after  returning  to  the 
work  force,  the  restrictions  and  exploita- 
tions of  the  corporate  office  world  became 
painfully  clear. 

From  the  start,  I  felt  unnerved  by  the  job 
that  I  was  doing  called  document  retrieval. 
I  had  retrieved  documents  for  myself  and 
others  during  my  school  and  work  study 
days,  but  I  didn't  remember  the  task  as 
being  so  odious.  At  this  job,  however,  I  saw 
how  the  rapacious  business  psychology  of 
the  profit  motive  induces  management  to 
attempt  to  shape  the  behavior,  outlook, 
and  soul  of  the  worker. 

The  receptionist  was  laid  off  one  day  and 
for  quite  some  time  I  had  two  jobs,  the  one 
that  I  was  hired  for  and  then  as  receptionist 
to  boot.  Still  receiving  my  original  one-job 
salary  and  willing  to  "help  out"  for  a 
while,  the  days  turned  into  many  weeks. 

Arriving  home  on  those  evenings  I 
seemed  to  lack  the  energy  for  the  kind  of 
interaction  that  is  truly  rewarding  for  any 
family.  Total  relaxation,  if  not  deep  sleep, 
was  wanted  on  the  menu  and  thus  even 
dinner  could  become  just  another  task  of 
the  day,  food  to  be  processed.  The  frenzied 
workpace  of  the  day  carried  over  to  the 
evening.  At  times  I  would  ask,  what  have  I 
done  today?  Has  the  day's  work  helped  to 
improve  or  only  to  sustain  my  family? 

Working  there  was  a  horror.  Never 
before  had  I  seen  how  the  profit  motive 
destroys  life.  And  it  was  not  only  the 
workers  there  who  were  exploited,  but  the 
University  of  California  libraries  as  well. 
The  corporate  design  of  the  multiversity 
goes  well  beyond  mere  business  propa- 
ganda and  extends  to  transforming  the 
university  libraries  into  photocopying  fac- 
tories of  the  multinationals.  So  there  I  was 
working  to  provide  for  my  family  by  slaving 
all  day  at  providing  the  companies  that  are 
destroying  the  earth  with  the  information 
needed  to  carry  out  their  destruction.  And 
in  the  office  I  had  to  refer  to  the  job  as 
"professional  document  retrieval."  Could  I 
come  home  at  the  end  of  the  day  and 
partake  in  any  real  meaningful  interaction 
with  my  wife  or  child? 

There  were  many  more  facets  of  that  job 
that  were  detrimental  to  family-life,  and 
my  suggestion  of  on-site  child  care  was  just 
one  more  reason  to  be  ridiculed  and 
harassed  by  my  bosses.  The  denial  of 
on-site  child  care  is  especially  discrimi- 
nating against  males.  In  order  for  child 
care  responsibilities  to  be  equally  shared 
among  women  and  men,  we  have  to 
debunk  the  idea  that  only  single  working 
mothers  have  the  need  for  child  care 
facilities  at  their  places  of  work.  Capitalism 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


says  that  I  have  to  work  eight  hours  a  day  — 
So  I  do.  But  why  shouldn't  we  wage  slaves 
at  least  have  the  satisfaction  of  spending 
our  15  minute  breaks  with  our  children?  Or 
would  on-site  child  care  facilities  allow  the 
children  to  see  what  was  ahead  and  thus 
resist  their  processing  for  the  office  of  the 
future? 

After  being  fired  for  having  a  "bad 
attitude"  I  was  hired  as  a  clerk-typist  at  a 
local  non-profit  institution.  Although  I  was 
determined  not  to  work  for  a  profit-seeking 
employer,  the  economic  necessity  of  find 
work  right  away  led  me  to  accept  the  first 
thing  that  come  along.  Although  the  work- 
load is  not  quite  as  heavy  as  before,  I  am 
still  away  from  my  child  all  day  and 
receiving  only  enough  money  to  eat  and 
pay  rent.  I  do  not  come  home  as  tired  as  I 
used  to,  but  I  do  still  tend  to  be  somewhat 
uneasy  due  to  the  authoritarian  constraints 
of  the  day. 

So  I  read  PW  wanting  to  hear  more 
because  it  all  sounds  so  true.  I  hope  more 
people  both  read  and  write  about  the  other 
side  of  the  corporate  money  economy  and 
this  mess  it  has  us  all  in. 

P.M.—  San  Francisco 


thing),  not  much  protest  happened.  But  we 
3  sleuth  waitresses  questioned  our  bosses, 
defied  the  rules  as  often  as  we  could  and 
supported  each  other  when  the  anger  and 
frustration  became  so  burdensome,  it 
nearly  exploded  out  of  us.  It's  no  fun  being 
watched  closely  and  judged  by  fellow 
workers.  The  rest  of  the  summer  made  us 
all  kinda  nervous. 

I'm  now  back  at  school  and  only  working 
part-time  but  the  same  tactics  are  being 
used.  Currently  there  are  many  more 
employees  but  management  still  tries  to 
set  us  up  against  each  other  so  no  real 


Dear  folks  at  PW, 

I  worked  last  summer  waitressing  in  a 
bar.  It  was  fairly  slow  at  first  but  became 
very  busy  over  July  &  August.  The  ten  of 
us  worked  together  in  harmony  until  early 
in  August  when  our  boss  (who  had  always 
been  a  reasonable  and  approachable 
person)  called  a  staff  meeting  and  accused 
us  all  of  stealing  money.  She  was  pretty 
wily,  didn't  give  any  of  us  enough  infor- 
mation to  make  the  situation  clear  but  the 
accusations  flew.  Needless  to  say,  we  were 
all  stunned.  She  spoke  to  the  bartenders 
and  the  waitresses  separately,  causing 
suspicion  and  division  among  us.  After  I 
had  gotten  over  the  initial  shock  of  the 
"charge"  brought  against  us,  I  realized 
how  our  boss  had  virtually  set  us  up 
against  each  other.  A  couple  of  the  other 
waitresses  and  myself  did  some  skutting 
and  found  out  that  the  profits  had  dropped 
by  $10,000  in  the  month  of  July,  but 
instead  of  checking  out  attendance  num- 
bers or  figuring  that  people  may  not  be 
drinking  as  much  cos  they  have  no  income, 
management  immediately  blamed  us.  Be- 
cause some  of  the  people  I  worked  with 
were  really  oppressed  by  the  danger  of 
losing  their  job  (funny  how  people  can  feel 
guilty  even  when  they  haven't  done  any- 


solidarity  happens.  Fortunately  there  are 
enough  people  who  refuse  to  be  co-opted 
into  spying  on  their  fellow  workers  — these 
are  my  friends  and  they  help  to  keep  my 
faith  in  human  dignity  alive. 

But  then  there's  my  friend  Dan  who's 
mostly  genius  and  a  superb  woodworker 
who  gets  paid  $4  an  hour  to  churn  out 
cheap  furniture  that  people  can  afford  but 
don't  appreciate.  He's  frustrated  cos  he 
can't  produce  the  beauty  that's  in  his  head. 

And  my  friend  Frieda,  who's  an  out- 
rageously talented  seamstress  and  artist 
who  lives  on  welfare  cos  she  can't  bring 
herself  to  sell  her  skills  the  way  our  society 
compels  us  to. 

And  Lawrence  who  tries  to  find  jobs  for 
guys  who  are  out  on  parole  — these  people 
can  be  and  are  sent  back  to  jail  because 
they're  not  looking  hard  enough  for  work! 
It's  hard  enough  to  find  a  job,  much  more 
so  if  you  have  a  "record." 

It  reminds  me  of  the  old  unemployment 


insurance  blues  — they'll  penalize  you  for 
quitting  your  job,  expect  you  to  be  satisfied 
to  live  on  %  of  your  wage  (which  was 
probably  peanuts  to  start  with),  and  then 
cut  you  off  if  you  dare  to  get  so  depressed 
that  you  stop  looking  for  the  job  you  know 
isn't  out  there.  (Victoria  has  the  second 
highest  rate  of  unemployment  in  Canada.) 

I  hate  the  system  we  live  in  and  some- 
times I  feel  crushed  by  it.  I'm  trying  to  do 
some  learning  but  the  university  here  isn't 
exactly  a  hotbed  of  political  awareness.  Too 
many  silly  kids  with  vacant  minds  and 
designer  clothes.  Too  many  profs  who  are 
hellbent  on  perpetuating  the  lies  we 
continue  to  be  taught. 

I  guess  I'll  just  keep  trying  to  develop  my 
humanness  so  I  won't  get  brainwashed  into 
thinking  it's  a  fantasy  to  want  the 
emotional  warmth  that  comes  from  being 
close  to  other  people.  (In  my  paranoid 
moments,  I  get  to  thinking  the  computeri- 
zation of  most  everything  will  gradually 
turn  us  into  robots  1)  But  I  grew  a  vegetable 
garden  this  summer  and  picked  berries 
that  grew  in  the  woods  (for  free)  so  I  could 
make  jam  and  wine  to  keep  the  winter  at 
bay,  and  these  days  I  hug  my  friends  a  lot 
and  turn  my  face  to  the  sun  when  it  pokes 
through  the  clouds.  I  also  read  Processed 
World  which  is  a  joy  cos  of  your  great 
sense  of  humor  about  a  world  that's 
sometimes  hard  to  find  anything  funny  in, 
but  mostly  cost  it's  always  a  reminder  that 
lots  of  us  are  out  there,  still  fighting,  still 
strong. 

Thanks  &  much  love, 
J. H. -P. -Victoria.  B.C. 

Dear  Processed  World, 

I  used  to  find  your  magazine  amusing, 
but  Drugs:  A  Corrosive  Social  Cement 
[PW  #11]  made  me  realize  how  utterly 
thoughtless  you  people  can  be. 

"Taking  pleasure  in  one's  own  thought 
processes,  perceptions,  and  feelings  can  be 
a  genuinely  subversive  experience" —well 
of  course  1  But  this  is  clearly  the  main 
reason  to  reject  the  use  of  drugs.  A  wise 
person  once  said,  "If  you  cannot  spout 
profound  ideas  and  insights  while  straight, 
then  they  are  not  yours  to  begin  with." 
Ever  heard  the  expression,  "Don't  take 
him  seriously  — that's  the  liquor  talking"?  I 
say  drugs  are  the  total  opposite  of  "taking 
pleasure  in  one's  own  thought  processes, 
perceptions,  and  feelings." 

Your  writer  babbles  on  and  on  about  the 
insight  and  pleasure  to  be  derived  from 
surrendering  one'  mind,  however  temp- 
orarily, to  a  stupid  chemical.  Be  real! 
These  feelings  are  illusions  at  best,  and 
comparing  them  to  self-acquired  insight 
and  pleasure  is  like  comparing  being 
strapped  into  a  rollercoaster  to  going  skate- 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


13 


UNCLE  SAM  WANTS  YOU 
TO  WORK 

•  40  hours  a  week 

•  50  weeks  a  year 

•  For  the  Rest  of  Your  Life! 

^■■wa  ■■■■■■■  ■■■■■■■■■■■'gggggi 


boarding  or  skiing.  It  is  like  comparing  TV 
soap  operas  and  singles  bar/prostitute  sex 
to  real  social  relations. 

Granted,  dealing  with  reality  requires  a 
great  deal  of  input  and  risk,  but  what  is  the 
benefit  of  greater  awareness  of  the  dream 
world  of  drugs?  To  refer  to  drug  induced 
stupor  as  "another  state  of  mind"  is  an 
insult  to  one's  true  need  for  real  fulfill- 
ment, in  the  only  existing  state  of  mind, 
which  is  reality.  Again:  drug  experiences 
are  illusions,  and  one  can  no  more  learn 
from  them  than  one  could  drink  from  a 
mirage  in  the  desert. 

Furthermore,  I  can't  help  but  feel  that 
the  "cool"  image  of  drugs  today,  like  the 
"cool"  image  of  corporate  music,  art,  and 
fashion,  is  just  another  step  to  induce  sub- 
mission. Opiates  are  now  the  religion  of  the 
people,  and  we  all  know  how  much  our  op- 
pressors love  to  see  us  dummy  up  to  any- 
thing that  would  make  us  feel  weak  and 
insignificant. 

As  for  the  rest  of  your  magazine,  I  see  a 
basic  contradiction.  You  protest  the  unfair- 
ness of  your  jobs,  yet  refuse  to  simply  quit 
because  you  demand  a  higher  standard  of 
living  than  the  majority  of  the  world's 
population!  You  demand  the  money  to 
make  others  grow  your  food,  shine  your 
shoes,  etc.  In  The  Tyranny  of  Time, 
Mead-O  questions  the  liberating  value  of 
quitting,  "unless  you  possess  the  personal 
resources  (both  monetary  and  psycho- 
logical) to  transcend  the  system."  Well, 
whose  fault  is  it  that  you  are  so  materialis- 
tic anyway?  Why  don't  you  just  turn  off  the 
stupid  TV  and  stop  running  out  and  buying 
everything  that  you've  been  told  will 
ensure  your  happiness?  You  know  full  well 


that  you  could  survive  on  the  cash  from  a 
half  hour's  worth  of  aluminum  can  collect- 
ing each  day.  Why  can't  you  accept  that 
the  only  real  reason  why  you  must  work  so 
much  is  because  you  demand  so  much?  Are 
you  in  charge  of  your  desires  or  do  they 
control  you?  Does  your  definition  of 
success  center  around  how  well  one 
controls  one's  desires  or  how  well  one 
submits  to  them? 

Perhaps  more  space  in  your  magazine 
ought  to  be  devoted  to  protest  of  the  truly 
manipulative  working  conditions  which 
exist  primarily  overseas.  Our  problems  are 
nothing  compared  to  those  of  a  laborer  in 
India,  an  artist  under  communism,  or  even 
the  most  well  educated  of  blacks  in  South 
Africa  (everyone  must  help  expose  the  lies 
we  are  being  told  about  "constructive 
engagement"  and  other  so-called  re- 
forms). Hopefully  you  will  find  space  for 
this  letter,  and  I  am  enclosing  my  address 
for  any  who  want  to  respond.  I've  written  a 
book  which  I  give  out  in  hope  of  opening 
intelligent  discussion  and  to  trade  for  the 
projects  of  others.  Thanks.  Bye. 

Richard  A.,  Box  16002, 
Arlington,  VA  22215 

Dear  P.W., 

Let's  face  it,  being  surrounded  by  maybe 
friends  and  lovers,  making  thousands  of 
dollars  a  day,  and  doing  it  from  the  comfort 
of  our  own  yacht,  sounds  like  a  pretty 
appealing  way  to  make  a  living  to  most 
people.  With  a  couple  of  hundred  bucks,  a 
couple  of  contacts  and  a  little  business 
savvy,  that  life  could  be  yours  in  less  than  a 
year.  How  you  may  ask?  Simple,  deal 
drugs,  any  and  all  drugs,  and  if  you  don't 
over-indulge  in  your  product  sampling,  the 
money,  friends  and  freedom  that  comes 
with  being  your  own  boss,  is  yours. 

Sound  too  good  to  be  true,  wondering 
where  the  catch  is,  and  how  do  I  know  it 
works?  Good  questions  and  maybe  I'll 
answer  them  out  of  that  great  fount  of 
wisdom.  Personal  Experience. 

Enough  of  that  late  night  TV  commer- 
cial, no  more  comic  book  come-ons  and 
cereal  box  sweepstakes.  I  like  the  article  on 
drugs  in  Processed  World  #11.1  won't  go 
into  specific  complaints  about  some  of  the 
details,  I'd  rather  concentrate  on  a  simple 
note  based  on  my  own  observations.  Don't 
expect  a  Diary  of  a  Drug  Fiend,  it's  been 
done  before. 

Drug  dealing  is  a  ' Chicago  boys'  style 
free  enterprise  zone  that  exists  in  every 
suburb  and  city  in  this  country.  I  write 
specifically  of  the  illegal  drug  economy, 
although  the  line  between  the  legal  and 
illegal  world  exists  primarily  in  the  minds 
and  jail  cells  of  the  body  of  lawyers, 
politicians,  religionists,  academics,  social 
workers  and  police  officials  whose  liveli- 
hoods depend  upon  the  existence  of  such 
laws  that  separate  the  good  from  the  bad. 
It  is  part  of  the  vast  world  of  the  shadow 


economy  that  surrounds  the  legal  one  just 
as  traditional  cultures  and  old  religions 
surround  and  infest,  and  even  feed  the 
world  of  Christianity,  that  bastion  of  order, 
illumination  and  legality  in  an  otherwise 
pagan  world.  Every  office  of  corporate 
order  is  the  breeding  ground  of  illicit 
sexual  affairs,  computer  time  theft,  get 
rich  quick  scams  by  bored  minds  in  thinly 
partitioned  cubicles,  secret  admirers  of  the 
amazing  nerve  of  the  scam  kings  at  the  top, 
the  bored  of  Directors.  Secret  anarchists 
all. 

Drugs,  ha,  securities  rip  offs,  back  office 
deals  with  the  corporate  officer  on  leave  of 
absence  to  perform  a  few  jobs  as  a 
presidential  aid.  Ed  Meese,  for  example,  is 
Attorney  General,  bad  news  for  California 
pot  dealers,  good  news  for  Afghani  heroin 
importers.  If  you  want  to  get  rich,  ya  got  to 
play  the  game.  No  honest  working  stiff  got 
anything  better  than  an  imitation  silk  lined 
coffin.  No  honest  christian  soul,  good  party 
worker,  or  faithful  of  any  sort  got  anything 
in  this  life  beyond  a  few  comforting 
thoughts  to  wear  like  the  baby's  security 
blanket,  the  blanket  at  least,  was  warm. 

Dreaming  the  revolution  is  about  as  good 
as  watching  it  on  TV.  It's  about  as  relevant 
as  chastising  the  terrible  drug  addict  for 
not  facing  the  facts  with  the  correct 
deluded  ideals.  It's  like  the  christians 
arguing  over  whether  Christ  is  coming  next 
week  or  next  year.  Who  is  going  to  save 
you?  As  it  has  always  been,  Anarchy  is 
where  the  heart  is.  How  you  bide  your  time 
in  social  relations  is  your  own  business.  If 
you  must  associate  (and  you  must)  associ- 
ate freely.  The  big  lie  is  the  world  of  the 
system.  Scratch  any  adult  and  a  child  waits 
to  be  set  free.  Questions  answered? 

Gary  Rumor  — S.F. 
P.S.  I'm  on  probation  and  anything  I  say 
can  be  used  against  me  and  probably  will. 


of  the  copies  made  on  a  company's 
Xerox  machine  have  nothing  whatsoever 
to  do  with  official  company  business 

Mad  magazine ^^ 


14 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


■V  H  K  H  *    M^    ^  H  X  M"  H "V »<  ■    >C >t  iC 

EQUAL 

OPPORTUNITY 
PARENTS: 


Just  How  Equal 
Can  We  Be? 


HE  post  WWII  baby-boomers  are  starting  a 
'baby-boom  of  their  own,  as  no  one  can  fail  to 
notice.  My  neighborhood  was  once  predomi- 
nantly inhabited  by  childless  adults.  Now  three 
moderate  to  expensive  new  baby  stores  have  opened, 
and  for  the  less  affluent,  the  baby  section  of  the  local 
St.  Vincents  has  expanded  by  several  racks.  The  parks 
are  full  of  snuggly  laden  parents  and  baby  carriages, 
and  a  number  of  new  magazines  on  "parenting"  and 
"mothering"  have  taken  their  place  beside  the 
magazines  for  the  "new  working  woman"  that 
appeared  in  the  '70s. 

Of  course,  in  many  neighborhoods  the  babies  never 
did  stop  coming.  The  preoccupation  with  children  is  a 
novelty  mainly  for  those  of  us  in  our  late  twenties  and 
thirties  whose  decision  to  postpone  having  children 
followed,  in  part,  a  conscious  rejection  of  the  traditional 
setup  of  our  parent's  generation. 

Many  of  us  who  are  new  mothers  have  been  deeply 
affected  by  the  feminist  and  radical  movements  of  the 
past  decades.  Because  the  second  wave  (post  WWII) 
feminist  movement  was  originally  focused  on  how  to 
get  out  of  the  imprisoning  role  of  "housewife,"  it 
devalued  childrearing  to  a  certain  extent.  Having 
children  was  tantamount  to  selling  out,  since  there 
seemed  to  be  no  way  a  woman  could  preserve  her 
independence  if  she  was  bound  to  the  obligations  of 
parenthood. 

But  for  many  of  us  now,  the  decision  to  have  children 


does  not  mean  we  have  turned  our  backs  on  feminist 
values,  rather,  points  to  our  determination  to  face  the 
challenge  of  raising  our  children  without  reverting  to 
the  traditional  primary  identity  of  dependent  mother- 
and-housewife.  This  means  we  must  find  ways  of 
balancing  our  valued  independence  with  new  parental 
roles  and  obligations.  In  particular,  it  means  a  much 
more  equal  distribution  of  childcare.* 

My  own  experience  in  sharing  childcare  with  my 
partner,  described  in  some  detail  below,  was  more 
complicated  and  conflict-ridden  than  the  generally 
accepted  feminist  convictions  on  the  subject  had  led  me 
to  believe  it  would  be.  But  it  also  confirmed  what 
feminists  have  been  saying  for  years.  Our  efforts  to 
balance  responsibility  for  child  and  home  gave  me  more 
opportunity  to  pursue  outside  interests  and  less  cause 
to  resent  my  child's  at  times-tyrannical  hold  over  my 
life.  Becoming  intimately  involved  in  our  baby's  needs 
and  accomplishments  on  a  daily  basis  has  provided  my 
partner  with  a  whole  range  of  emotional  experience, 
which  Marguerite  Duras  once  referred  to  as  the 
"explosion    of    the    ego."    He    has    discovered    the 

*  I  am  addressing  the  question  from  the  point  of  view  of  a 
heterosexual  parent-couple  living  together,  monogamous  or  not, 
living  communally  or  not.  Obviously,  there  are  many  households  this 
does  not  address.  But  I  am  writing  informed  by  my  experience.  I 
hope  this  will  not  be  taken  as  a  plug  for  heterosexuality  or  as  a 
condemnation  of  single-parent  families,  but  rather,  if  anything,  as  a 
call  for  special  consideration  and  support  for  people  in  this  situation. 
I  know  several  single  mothers  who  have  made  conscious  planned 
decisions,  which  is  I  strongly  suspect  a  more  healthy  environment 
than  unwanted  kids  in  two  parent  households. 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


i 

A^' 
^     ^ 

/"^NO!  Not  ANOTHER^ 
'^^poopy  diaper!!         ^ 

1 

■&»  -<^~)l 

L^^"^^^ 

\f^ 

f 

^ 

^^J^ 
\  ^^~,i«\   ' 

'Pace  It,  you're  not  cut  out  for  thi$^ 
kind  of  work.  Susan's  better  at  it... 
kLet  her  do  it!                     -     -^ 

^ 

However,  less  easily  or  widely  talked 
about  is  the  fact  that  these  externally 
imposed  conditions  are  often  supported 
and  reproduced  by  women's  own  beha- 
vior. Recently,  some  feminists  have 
begun  to  argue  that  we  cannot  under- 
stand the  persistence  of  male  institu- 
tional power  over  women  without  del- 
ving into  the  deeply  rooted  psychological 
differences  that  underlie  gender,  in 
doing  so,  they  have  confirmed  our  earlier 
intuitions  about  the  importance  of 
shared  child  rearing  in  the  early  years. 

Two  authors  in  particular,  Nancy 
Chodorow  and  Dorothy  Dinnerstein  ar- 
gue   that    the     pervasive,     underlying 


the  separation  less  complete  than  for 
boys,  because  they  continue  to  identify 
with  mom  as  being  of  the  same  sex.  The 
resulting  permeability  of  women's  ego 
boundaries  is  the  basis  for  women's 
desires  to  be  mothers  themselves.  It  is 
also  explains  why  women's  lives  tend 
more  than  men's  to  center  around 
personal  relationships,  and  why  they 
find  it  harder  to  formulate  separate 
interests  and  act  on  them.  The  impera- 
tive for  boys  to  separate  so  completely 
from  their  mothers  also  leads  them  to 
devalue  women  in  order  to  affirm  their 
independence.  Chodorow  concludes  that 
to  avoid  the  harmful  consequences  of 


t^r?frrr^^»»»w^^^^»w^^y^r^^^^■»^^^^■^^^t^^^^■?^»^»^?^?^^^^*^?^■?^^-*^?■^^■^^^^■^t»^^^^^^^*^-*-*-''J^*^^''^^ 


I  had  seen  how  other  friends  slipped  back  into  a  situation  where  mom  was 
handed  the  baby  when  it  needed  consolation  or  a  diaper  change,  and  dad  was 
absolved...  because  he  was  bringing  home  the  bacon. 


"maternal"  generosity  that  is  rewarded 
so  tangibly  and  directly  with  the  uncon- 
ditional love  and  trust  of  another  being, 
and  has  gained  a  more  sympathetic 
understanding  of  "feminine"  roles. 

Eroding  Gender  Identities 

Another,  more  future-oriented  reason 
for  wanting  our  partners  to  participate 
fully  in  childcare  is  to  help  our  children 
see  beyond  gender  stereotypes  from  an 
early  age,  and  thus  be  better  able  to 
combat  them. 

Of  course,  we  (and  our  children  as 
they  grow)  still  confront  inequalities  that 
persist  throughout  society,  from  wage 
and  job  discrimination  to  judicial  tol- 
erance of  the  physical  abuse  and 
intimidation  directed  against  women,  to 
culture  and  media  saturated  with  sexist 
imagery.  All  of  these  problems  have 
been  exhaustively  analyzed  in  feminist 
writing. t 

t  In  tile  following  discussion  I  have  not  dwelt 
on  the  broader  social  and  economic  changes 
that  have  transformed  the  conditions  of 
family  life  (e.g.,  by  drawing  women  into  the 
workforce).  This  is  not  because  I  consider 
them  less  important  or  determinant  than  the 
more  specific,  personal  questions  discussed 
here,  but  rather  because  they  have  received 
more  attention  and  have  been  adequately 
analyzed  in  many  other  articles  (in  Processed 
World,  "Roots  of  Disillusionment"  in  PW  6 
and  "Female  Troubles"  in  PW  3).  For  similar 
reasons  I  have  avoided  a  discussion  on 
communal  childrearing.  Much  has  been 
written  about  the  results  (usually  discourag- 
ing) of  such  experiments.  Besides,  except  for 
a  few  cases  such  as  Israeli  kibbutzim  the 
issues  discussed  below  are  relevant  whether 
or  not  parents  live  communally,  since  in  any 
case  biological  parents  usually  continue  to 
have  primary  responsibility  for  their  very 
young  children. 


mysogyny  and  the  subordinate  role  of 
women  are  strongly  determined  by  the 
fact  that  women  are,  by  and  large,  the 
sole  primary  caretakers  of  children.  The 
intimate  and  near-exclusive  dependent 
relationship  of  an  infant  to  their  mother 
creates  psychological  dynamics  that  can 
lead  to,  or  at  least  reinforce,  crippling 
gender  splits. 

Generally  speaking,  men  in  this 
culture  are  emotionally  more  self-con- 
tained, less  expressive  and  'in  touch" 
with  the  feelings  of  those  around  them, 
yet  they  have  a  stronger  sense  of  self 
than  women,  who  tend  to  define  them- 
selves more  in  relation  to  others  and 
have  a  greater  need  and  capacity  for 
intimacy  and  nurturing.  When  these  dif- 
ferences become  extreme,  relations  be- 
tween the  sexes  grow  difficult,  and 
social/political  equality  is  impossible. 
Men  are  ruthlessly  individualistic,  dis- 
dainful of  women  and  incapable  of  the 
emotional  intimacy  women  desire,  while 
women  lack  the  confidence  to  become 
independent  subjects  in  the  world  at 
large,  and  are  self-sacrificial  yet  resent- 
ful of  men's  capacity  for  detachment  and 
self-advancement. 

Chodorow  traces  these  personality  dif- 
ferences between  the  sexes  to  the 
differing  relationships  mothers  have  to 
their  sons  and  daughters.  Every  child 
must  go  through  a  process  of  separation 
from  their  mother,  the  first  step  in 
evolving  an  identity  of  their  own.  For 
boys,  separation  and  individuation  is 
facilitated  by  the  recognition  that  they 
are  unlike  their  mothers,  a  fact  that 
mothers  also  underscore  by  their  beha- 
vior. 

For  girls,  the  relationship  with  their 
mother  is  longer  and  more  intimate  and 


extreme  gender  differentiation  men 
must  participate  in  the  primary  care  of 
children.  In  this  way,  infants  can  develop 
close,  intimate  ties  to  both  same-sex  and 
different-sex  adults. 

Dinnerstein  sees  resentment  against 
woman  in  society  at  large  as  stemming 
from  the  infant's  helpless  dependence 
on  her/his  mother.  In  the  limited  world 
of  the  infant,  mother  is  omnipotent,  and 
consequently,  she  is  blamed  for  anything 
that  goes  wrong.  Furthermore,  when  the 
child  strives  to  be  independent  he/she 
resents  the  continuing  need  for  mom. 
Infantile  resentment  and  rage  initially 
directed  against  the  power  of  one 
woman,  turns  into  fear,  anger  and 
resentment  against  powerful  women  in 
general.  Like  Chodorow,  Dinnerstein 
concludes  that  men  must  get  involved  in 
childcare  early  in  infants'  lives.  In  this 
way,  negative  feelings  carried  over  from 
infancy  will  become  less  gender-linked; 
women  will  not  be  saddled  with  deeply- 
ingrained  associations  of  fear  and  resent- 
ment. 

Other  researchers  reject  a  psychoana- 
lytic approach  in  favor  of  models  of  child 
development  that  place  greater  empha- 
sis on  early  exposure  to  gender  stereo- 
types. A  recent  example  of  this  analysis 
is  Sandra  Bem's  article  in  Signs  (Sum- 
mer 1983).  Bem  argues  that  children  get 
ideas  about  sexual  identity  according  to 
a  set  schedule  of  intellectual  develop- 
ment. However,  the  specific  ideas  they 
get  about  sexual  identity  depends  on 
their  observations  and  experience,  par- 
ticularly of  their  closest  role-models  — 
that  is,  in  most  cases,  their  parents. 
Sex-stereotyping  in  children  can  be 
avoided,  Bem  claims,  by  eliminating  dif- 
ferences in  what  parents  do  with  their 


16 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


children,  for  example,  by  ensuring  that 
both  male  and  female  parents  take  turns 
cooking,  bathing,  etc.,  and  also  by 
providing  children  of  both  sexes  with 
similar  toys  and  clothes.  In  this  way, 
children  won't  get  rigid  ideas  from 
society  about  what  men  and  women  can 
and  can't  do  or  be. 

Both  "psychoanalytic"  and  Bern's 
cognitive/environmental  approaches 
agree  that  gender  constraints  are  forged 
to  some  extent  by  the  fact  that  women  do 
the  lioness'  share  of  bringing  up 
children.  Seen  in  this  light,  getting  men 
more  intimately  involved  in  caring  for 
children  becomes  an  important  way 
parents  can  help  their  kids  get  a  good 
start  on  undermining  the  sex/gender 
stereotypes  in  our  society. 

But  Putting  It  Into  Practice... 

This  theoretical  background  influ- 
enced me  greatly  so  that  by  the  time  my 
partner  and  I  finally  decided  to  have  a 
child,  after  years  of  deliberation,  we 
solemnly  swore  that  childcare  would  be 
divided  50/50.  We  would  each  get  part- 
time  jobs  and  split  domestic/childcare 
and  breadwinning  duties  in  half.  I  had 
seen  how  other  friends  slipped  back  into 
a  situation  where  mom  was  handed  the 
baby  when  it  needed  consolation  or  a 


diaper  change,  and  dad  was  absolved 
from  many  primary  childcare  respon- 
sibilities because  he  was  bringing  home 
most  of  the  bacon.  I  was  convinced  that 
we  would  be  different  because  we  were 
committed  to  the  idea,  and  both  had 
more  or  less  equivalent  money-making 
capabilities  (both  of  us  make  a  living 
manipulating  keyboards).  Moreover,  we 
had  close  family  members  nearby  who 
were  eager  to  help  with  childcare  and 
some  savings  to  help  us  through  the  first 
few  months  after  birth. 

I  was  not  prepared  for  the  difficulties 
in  store  for  us.  From  the  outset,  my 
partner  was  very  devoted  and  took  far 
more  responsibility  for  our  baby  than 
most  fathers  do.  He  held  her  a  lot, 
burped  her,  and  took  turns  with  night 
feedings.  But  despite  our  best  inten- 
tions, for  most  of  the  first  year  of  our 
daughter's  life,  he  spent  a  good  deal  less 
time  with  her  than  I  did,  and  as  a  result, 
at  fourteen  months,  she  is  still  more 
attached  to  and  easily  consoled  by  me. 
What  happened? 

The  imbalances  began  well  before  our 
daughter  was  born,  in  the  form  of  over- 
whelming prejudice  about  what  makes  a 
good  mother.  Like  many  women  of  my 
age,  I  got  a  lot  of  my  information  about 
pregnancy  and  childcare  from  the  count- 


^?ft?!^&'^^??'^?^$'?!'ft?l^^^^^'^-ft?!^?t^^?ft^4?ft&t^ftftft^ 


Sticks  and  Stones  May  Break  Our  Bones 
But  We'll  Never  Do  The  DishesW 


less  new  books  on  the  subject. 

Of  the  three  or  four  most  popular 
books  I  read,  (e.g.  The  Womanly  Arts  of 
Breastfeeding,  published  by  La  Leche 
League,  The  First  12  Months  of  Life,  by 
Frank  Caplan)  every  one  emphasized  the 
absolute  need  of  infants  for  their 
mothers  to  be  with  them  as  much  as 
possible. 

The  feminist-inspired  midwifery 
movement  encourages  fathers  to  get 
informed  and  participate  in  childbirth 
preparation.  But  advice  on  childcare  is 
overwhelmingly  directed  at  mothers  and 
relegates  fathers  to  a  secondary  role  of 
relief  and  support  for  Mom. 

In  much  of  the  expert  literature, 
mothers  are  told  that  babies  need  the 
constant  loving  attention  of  a  single 
person.  Only  mother  has  the  instincts 
and  dedication  to  respond  immediately 
and  appropriately  to  her  child's  de- 
mands. If  she  neglects  this  sacred  obli- 
gation, her  child  will  fail  to  develop  a 
sense  of  security  and,  according  to  some 
child  development  experts,  will  become 
insecure  and  grow  fearful  of  others,  or 
worse.  Mothers  are  advised  to  postpone 
going  back  to  work  for  the  first  few 
years,  if  possible.  They  are  encouraged 
to  breast-feed  as  long  as  possible,  using 
breast-pumps  or  going  home  during 
lunch  breaks  to  feed  baby  if  they  must 
work. 

That  breast-feeding  is  once  again 
becoming  socially  acceptable  is  a  good, 
healthy  development.  But  unfortunately, 
extraordinary  emphasis  on  benefits  of 
breast-feeding  for  babies  has  made  it  a 
new  standard  of  good  mothering.  I  have 
often  heard  women  speak  as  though  the 
length  of  time  they  breastfed  was  an 
indication  of  how  devoted  they  were  to 
their  children  (La  Leche  League).  The 
danger  is  that  women  will  feel  obligated 
to  continue  breastfeeding  "for  the  good 
of  the  baby"  beyond  the  time  when  it  is 
pleasurable  or  convenient  to  them.  One 
friend  described  to  me  how  resentful  she 
began  to  feel  every  time  her  8-month  old 
daughter  wanted  to  take  the  breast.  Yet 
because  of  social  pressures,  she  kept  on 
breast-feeding  for  several  months. 

It  is  discouraging  to  find  that  the 
enlightened  approach  to  pregnancy  and 


PROCESSED  WORLD  «14 


17 


BANKON  YOUR  CHILD'S  FUTURE 


i^s^^Ml&} 


With  the  all  new  Infant-A-Charge  ©itH 
faith  in  the  youngest  generation  of  Annericans  to  keep  on 
paying  long  after  you're  gone! 

SPEND  NOW! 
S/HE'LL  PAY  LATER! 

©ityCorpse's  Infant-A-Charge® 

same  age  who  spend  much  more  time 
exclusively  with  their  mothers. 

But  not  all  of  my  difficulties  in  getting 
out  and  pursuing  non-baby-reiated  in- 
terests were  due  to  social  pressures. 
First  of  all,  the  inescapable  truth  is  that 
during  the  first  few  months  after  my 
baby's  birth  I  was  more  prepared  to 
devote  a  lot  of  my  time  and  energy  to 
caring  for  her,  and  got  more  pleasure  out 
of  it  than  her  father  did.  Partly  this  was 
due  to  the  typically  feminine  personality 
traits  which,  if  Chodorow  and  Dinner- 
stein  are  correct,  stem  from  the  fact  that 
I  was  raised  primarily  by  my  own  mother 
in  my  early  years.  But  what  these  studies 
downplay  is  that  the  physical  and 
psychic  connection  to  the  baby  dev- 
eloped during  pregnancy,  childbirth, 
and  breastfeeding  helped  to  prepare 
me  for  the  intensity  of  my  relationship  to 
our  baby  in  a  way  my  partner  could  not 


childcare  that  encourages  self-reliance 
often  goes  along  with  the  traditional 
disregard  for  a  woman's  desires  for  a  life 
beyond  baby.  This  attitude  implies  a 
sacrificial  attitude  towards  mothering 
and  idealizes  the  possibility  of  mother 
being  the  sole  provider  of  any  and  all  of  a 
child's  needs  and  desires. 

As  much  as  I  recognized  these  biases 
and  resisted  them,  I  could  not  avoid 
lingering  feelings  of  guilt  and  doubt 
when  I  was  away  from  my  child.  This 
was  reinforced  by  attitudes  of  others; 
when  friends  or  acquaintances  saw  me 
without  my  baby,  they  would  inevitably 
ask  me  where  she  was.  At  first,  before 
they  realized  how  much  time  he  spent 
with  her,  people  rarely  asked  this 
question  of  her  father  when  he  was  out 
and  about.  When  we  were  together 
socially,  questions  about  her  were 
usually  directed  at  me.   Many  people. 


especially  in  our  parents'  generation, 
were  puzzled  or  disapproving  or  un- 
comprehending of  my  desires  to  do 
things  which  had  nothing  to  do  with 
babies. 

Consequently,  every  time  my  daugh- 
ter was  particularly  fussy  or  difficult,  I 
would  be  afraid  I  wasn't  spending 
enough  time  with  her,  even  though  I 
gave  her  at  least  several  hours  every 
day,  and  most  of  the  time  several  days  of 
the  week.  I  finally  realized  that  her 
fussiness  was  not  caused  by  my  absence, 
since  its  pattern  didn't  coincide  with 
changes  in  the  amount  of  time  I  spent 
with  her.  On  the  contrary,  I  noticed  that 
at  times  she  fussed  because  I  was  frus- 
trated or  frenzied  after  an  extended  time 
of  being  with  her  alone.  Moreover, 
although  she  goes  through  periods  of 
clinginess,  she  is  far  more  sociable  and 
eager  to  go  to  others  than  infants  of  the 


18 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


experience  directly. 

In  her  article  "A  Biosocial  Perspective 
on  Parenting"  {Daedulus,  1977)  Alice 
Rossi  argues  that  there  is  a  "biologically 
based  potential  for  heightened  invest- 
ment of  mothers  in  their  children,  at 
least  in  the  first  few  months,  that 
exceeds  the  potential  for  men  "  She 
refers  to  recent  research  in  the  field  of 
neuroendocrinology  that  points  to  the 
effects  of  social  stimuli  on  hormonal 
secretions,  as  transmitted  through  the 
nervous  system.  There  are  many  un- 
learned responses  of  v^^omen  to  children 
which,  she  argues,  are  physiologically 
based,  (in  contrast  to  the  Chodorow- 
Dinnerstein  theory  that  the  maternal 
"instinct"  is  first  and  foremost  a  cultural 
construct),  infant  crying,  for  example, 
stimulates  the  secretion  oxytocin  which 
in  turns  leads  to  the  nipple  erection  that 
occurs  preparatory  to  breastfeeding. 

Rossi  suggest  that  these  biological 
propensities  affect  the  ease  with  which 
males  and  females  learn  to  unlearn 
socially  defined  values  regarding  mascu- 
line and  feminine  behavior.  It  would  be 
interesting  to  study  what  hormonal 
changes,  if  any,  occur  in  men  in 
response  to  infants.  Rossi's  argument  is 
not  meant  to  imply  that  men  and  women 
are  biologically  confined  to  their  gender 
roles  as  they  have  been  established  in 
our  society.  Rather,  it  means  that  we 
must  recognize  differences  that  do  exist 
and  find  ways  of  compensating  for  them. 
In  particular,  if  our  goal  is  to  equalize 
parental  roles  and  relationships  between 
men  and  women,  we  must  provide  men 
with  opportunities  to  spend  time  with 
small  children  and  to  learn  how  to  care 
for  them.  This  will  help  close  the  gap 
produced  by  the  physical  experience  of 
pregnancy,  birth  and  breastfeeding. 

As  much  as  I  believe  that  childcare 
should  be  equalized,  I  would  not  want  to 
sacrifice  these  uniquely  female  experi- 
ences. The  intensity  of  the  first  few  days 
and  weeks  of  intimacy  with  my  newborn, 
and  the  sensual  pleasure  I  got  out  of 
breastfeeding  were  not  only  welcome 
rewards  for  the  drudgeries  of  pregnancy 
and  childbirth,  but  incomparable  eu- 
phoric experiences. 

Biological  differences  have  been 
downplayed  in  much  of  feminist  litera- 
ture for  fear  of  giving  credence  to  con- 
servative sexist  arguments.  But  I  believe 
the  great  changes  in  society  that 
feminists  point  to  would  receive  wider 
audience  and  support  if  they  were  more 


realistic  about  the  difficulties  involved, 
including  an  acknowledgement  of  the 
biosocial  factors. 

In  my  own  case,  though  my  partner 
was  devoted  and  involved,  the  dif- 
ferences I  perceived  in  his  attentiveness 
and  readiness  to  foresee  and  respond  to 
the  child's  needs  made  me  feel  discour- 
aged and  angry  with  him.  These  feelings 
stemmed  largely  from  my  belief,  fol- 
lowing my  reading  of  Chodorow  and 
Dinnerstein,  that  there  was,  in  fact, 
nothing  inherent  to  inhibit  equal  child- 
care  from  infancy. 

Once  I  understood  and  accepted  the 
(partly  biological)  basis  of  my  deeper 
emotional  attachment  to  our  baby,  rather 
than  trying  to  deny  or  discredit  it,  it 
became  easier  for  my  partner  and  I  to 
sort  out  and  compensate  for  our  dif- 
ferences and  desires. 

I  wanted  my  partner  to  spend  more 
time  with  our  child,  but  I  was  ambivalent 
and  uncertain  about  changing  things. 
For  one  thing,  because  of  my  relatively 
greater  psychic  investment  in  mother- 
hood, it  was  harder  to  regain  interest 
and  confidence  in  activities  outside 
mothering.  Although  at  times  I  felt 
burdened  and  frustrated  by  my  daugh- 
ter's greater  attachment  to  me,    there 


were  times  when  it  made  me  feel  very 
happy  and  gratified. 

At  some  point  in  the  first  couple  of 
months  after  her  birth,  I  developed  a 
protective  attitude  towards  the  baby  that 
tended  to  reinforce  real  and  perceived 
inadequacies.  I  would  watch  my  partner 
carefully  and  correct  and  criticize  his 
way  of  doing  things  or  admonish  him 
because  I  thought  he  was  not  being 
attentive  enough.  My  partner  responded 
defensively  by  denying  that  there  were 
any  differences  in  our  behavior  with  the 
child.  This  led  to  a  kind  of  vicious  circle 
since  the  more  I  demonstrated  I  knew 
better,  the  less  likely  he  was  to  take  the 
initiative,  the  more  quickly  I  took  over 
and  then  resented  what  I  saw  as  his 
indifference  or  inadequacy.  The  fact  that 
I  was  always  the  one  who  initiated  any 
discussion  on  the  subject  made  me  feel 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


19 


"^SnTHtR  exariwfi  Si  mew  havS^ 


'-^ 


,^  ^^^o.c^-^5^  ®'^;'' 


doubW  bLTdened^  eombined  to  set 

AU  of  these  elements  CO  ^^^^(^    , 

a  pattern  that  was  d.«.c^^^,,^^^ 

t.nalW  ^«^°S"'X^  '1  e  of  and  unhapPY 
one  most  directly  ^^^^^  °  ^^^as  up  to 
,,hthe.mbalance.nd.tes^^^^,^^^^,,, 

n^e  to  sort  through  rny  ^^^^ge. 

„gs  and  -^^; -STrespond  when 
MY  partner  was  QU  ck  ^^^ 

>    made    my    ^^'^^   eneral  princples 

eventually  f^^  °^"  ^e  reached  agree- 

-^  "':t  T  les       -essarv  for  me  to 

ment,  it  was  lebs 

take  the  init.at.ve  negotiating    the 

Most    important    i  ^^\^^^,^  was 

^-"^'^t^Xve'peanc  times  of  the 
that  each  of  us  have  sp  „^^„   „, 

day  or  week  w^^n  je       .^  ^^^^  ^^^^^ 

--off"  duty.  1  -^^^''"f -ope    my  partner 
foretime  together  alone,  ^^^    ^.^^^,^ 

would   f'g^:;^  .7"  t  schedule  it  was  too 

^rrtor-->'p-^ 

^tsherfatherspentm-time^ 
baby,  he  naturally  became     ^^  ^^^ 
ested   in  ^er  and   atten         . 
details  of  her  l.fe.H.s  mc     ^^^  ^^^^  ^j 

abilities.  ,.       that    if    my 

,    also   came    to    realize  ^^^^.j^ 

,,er    handled    ch,ldc;^e        ^^^^^  ^^ 

than  I  did,  o-;;.f.^^|,^r3t,les.  Somewhat 
trde^dtr^nVom  one  parent 


u  .  hPalthy  compensation  for 
^^Y  even  be  a  ^^^  ^verprotectiveness 
a  tendency  towadsov    p^^^^^  ^^  ^ 

from  the  other^Mho-8^^  ^^^^^^^  ,,,  , 
constancy  in  "'^^  ^^^at  exaggerated, 
believe  this  is  ^""^^  j^^  enough  love 
AS  long  as  .nfants  rece.     ^^^  ^^^^  ^^^ 

and  their  P^Y^'"'  "^^^^  different  per- 
opportunity  to  exper  en  «  .^^^^^.^ 

sonalities  in  ^ ^^f:^^^l c\.M' s  abiljty 
^'^rpftrtherhanres  they  inevitably 

rncln^rastheygrowuP^^^^,^ 

Perhaps  if  we  ever  have  a  ^.^^ 

,any  of  the  P-^'^^^/^rMfparfner  will 

around  will  be  avo.de^^  My  P  ^^ 

be  more  knowledgeable  a  ^^^   ^^^ 

and  1  -il'^^^^^utlSeve  we  won't 
conflicts  in  ^^ore-  B^^  ^be^.es  discussed 
^^"'Tlea  tin  this  early  period  of 
here,   at  least 

infancy.  , .       „  a  mother  and 

The  experience  of  bem^  ^  .^  .^rew  me 

my  attempts  to  P-Pf:,^,pest  splits 
right  up  against  one  o  ^^^     ^.^e 

in    modern    fen^'"'^"'  .^  ^y  Chodorow 
(represented  in    his  case  by^^^^^.^^  ^^ 

and  Dinnerstein)  ^s  ^^  ^^^^^^s 

social  freedom  and  eq  po,,erful  motor 
which  has  been  the  mo^^^f  ^^  ^,^  ..^er 
„^  the  women  s  moveme       ^^.^^^^  ^^^ 

(typified  by  the  fern  n^J  ^^^  belief, 

L^astfeeding  >'^;;^f  ^  ^\;e   inherently 
^'^°  ^''■\m  heater    apacity  of  women 

(biologically)  8^^f,_^_,f^,sh  affections, 
ior  nurturing  andjnse^s^^  ^^^^^^   ^^^ 
,  have  come  to  see  ^  ^^^,, 

Hniitations  on  both  sides 


1     ^  thp  contradic- 

-- rh^h^f^^-^ -- -^^ 
^i^'-r^ar^:-p^ 

n^eninchildrearingisac^^^    parental 

feminist    thinking^    «"  ^^.al  as 

experience  can  never  be  ^^.^^^^n. 

long  as  women  continue  t^^^  ^^^^.^^^  ^^ 
The  struggle  for  equa  ^^emes    of 

and    should    ^7^1  especially  insofar 
gender  differentiat^n^esP       ^  ^^^^^^,. 

as  they  condemn  women  ^^^^  ^^ 

nate  role  in  ,7,^.'^;Vical  rtandpoint,  1  can 
ownpersonal/histor'ca  ^^^^   ^^ 

neither    'niagine,    nor  j.^hed,  as 

d.fferences  m  gender  be^^  ^^^ 

some  fen^"^'^  ^^,'Xealing  to  me  than 
androgyny  is  less  ^PP  j^nientarity  be- 
some  notion  of  7^P,„ows  for  differ- 
--nrrnTdef^   behavior    without 

'penWing  either  one. 


_by  MaxineHolz 


The  Perfect  Gift  For  A  Baby  Shower! 

Give  A  Lifetime  Subscription  to  Processed  World! 

Only  $100! 


20 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


Editor's  Introduction 

Monica  Slade  lives,  works  and  brings  up  her  two 
children  in  north  London,  England.  She  is  active  in  her 
local  Labour  Party  despite  her  skepticism  about 
national  electoral  politics  — i.e.  about  the  idea  that  a 
new  Labour  government  would  bring  any  significant 
positive  change  for  working  people.  She  argues  that  the 
local  party  organizations  are  a  ready-made  network 
through  which  "grassroots"  campaigns  can  be  initiated 
and  people  informed  and  organized.  In  support  of  this 
view,  she  cites  the  role  of  the  local  parties  in  organizing 
opposition  to  nuclear  weapons  (Labour  favors  nuclear 
disarmament,  at  least  on  paper)  and  social  service  cuts, 
as  well  as  support  for  major  strikes  such  as  the  miners' 
last  year.  This  article  was  originally  written  for  the 
magazine  London  Labour  Briefing. 

OT  so  long  ago,  children  were  an  unavoidable 
consequence  of  sexual  activity.  (And  in  many 
'places,  they  still  are.)  A  natural  phenomenon, 
totally  beyond  our  control.  Like  the  weather,  only 
worse. 

The  constant  and  substantial  burden  of  childbirth 
and  childcare  has  barred  most  women,  no  matter  what 
their  race,  creed,  or  culture,  from  development  and 
achievement  in  any  other  field.  So  bless  Mary  Stopes 
and  the  other  pioneers  of  birth  control  because  it  is  the 
very  thing,  the  only  thing,  that  frees  women  from  their 


traditional,  transcultural  shackles. 

True,  our  present  means  of  birth  control  are  far  from 
perfect.  But  whatever  their  various  drawbacks,  these 
are  easier  to  cope  with  than  an  unwanted,  unloved, 
unaffordable  baby. 

Now  that  we  have  a  choice,  we  also  have  to  consider 
what  we  are  doing,  and  why.  To  bring  a  child  into  the 
world  means  a  commitment  for  life.  One  from  which 
there  is  no  turning  back,  without  causing  painful 
emotional  traumas  to  everyone  involved.  So  it  is  a 
decision  which  we  consider  very  carefully  indeed. 

Ideology  and  Reality 

Cath  Tate,  a  London  Labour  Party  activist,  recently 
wrote;  "Women  who  want  to  succeed  in  politics  have 
first  to  overcome  the  dominant  ideology  that  states  that 
our  true  fulfillment  in  life  comes  from  being  a  wife  and 
mother.  This  is  still  the  main  barrier  to  women  coming 
forward  in  representative  numbers  to  stand  for 
election." 

This  is  a  load  of  rubbish!  It  is  a  right-wing  analysis: 
isolationist  and  competitive.  Why?  Because  it  blames 
the  individual  woman  for  failing  to  overcome  a  problem 
that  is  in  fact  communal.  It  is  presented  as  a  psycho- 
logical issue,  instead  of  being  recognized  for  the 
sociological  one  that  it  is.  There  is  nothing  ideologically 
wrong  with  women  who  choose  to  become  mothers. 
(What's  the  matter,  Cath  Tate,  didn't  you  have  one?) 
But  there  is  something  practically  wrong  with  a  society 
that  doesn't  provide  some  adequate  form  of  communal 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


childcare.  THIS  is  THE  barrier  to  women 
coming  forward  in  representative  numbers 
for  anything  that  demands  serious  commit- 
ment. 

Motherhood  as  an  Act 

of  Political  Defiance 

Consider  the  situation:  The  world  is 
being  poisoned,  polluted,  depleted,  abused 
and  mismanaged  on  a  'grandiose  and 
unprecedented  scale.  Death  and  disaster 
will  probably  follow.  Nuclear  weapons 
mean  we  are  also  under  constant  threat  of 
immediate,  painful,  and  total  extinction. 
Two-thirds  of  the  world's  people  are  under- 
nourished or  actually  dying  from  hunger 
and  thirst.  Of  the  remainder,  many  are 
poor,  unhealthy,  live  in  unhygienic  and 
cramped  conditions,  and  largely  miss  out 
on  any  further  education. 

Almost  everywhere  capitalism  rules.  The 
profit-motive  is  paramount.  The  interests 
of  multinational  companies  are  served  — 
and  fanatically  protected  — by  sham  gov- 
ernments whose  claims  to  be  the  guardians 
of  freedom  and  democracy  are  a  farce  and  a 
fallacy.  Why  should  anyone  in  their  right 
mind  wish  to  bring  children  into  this  lousy 
world? 

Because  when  we  lose  the  courage  to  be 
mothers  we  are  truly  defeated  in  our  hearts 
and  in  our  minds.  When  we  don't  dare  to 
have  babies  anymore  because  they  dim- 
inish our  competitiveness,  politically  and 
commercially,  that  is  when  we  really  accept 
the  system  for  what  it  is  and  conform  to  it. 
It  is  the  surrender  of  our  true  and  primitive 
nature  to  capitalism's  sick  rationale. 

Community  and  Status 

Community:  that  includes  all  of  us. 
Many  people,  mostly  women,  spend  their 
time  and  energy  caring  and  providing  for 
those  who  are  unable  to  do  it  for  them- 
selves. Not  only  our  children,  but  also  our 
old  folk,  our  sick,  and  our  disabled.  On  this 
labour  of  love  and  compassion,  the  whole 
edifice  of  human  society  is  built.  And  yet 
this  work  — humble,  and  menial,  carried 
out  unseen  in  huts  and  hovels  and  homes 
throughout  the  world  — has  no  status  what- 
soever. Those  who  carry  it  out  earn 
nothing,  not  even  respect.  This  applies 
especially  to  mothers,  even  in  this  so-called 
democratic  country  where  we  are  supposed 
to  have  equal  rights.  Some  say  that  to  have 
children  is  ideologically  wrong.  Others 
seem  to  think  it  is  a  self-indulgent  thing 
that  women  do.  Still  others  that  we  do  it 
because  we  can't  think  of  anything  else.  I 
say  that  in  having  and  rearing  children  we 
make  a  substantial  and  valuable  contri- 
bution to  socity.  The  love  and  time  we  give 
our  children  will  benefit  you  all.  They  will 
do  the  work  when  you  are  too  old.  They  will 
feed  you  and  pay  your  bills.  They  will 
defend  your  rights  when  you  are  helpless. 


feeble  old  fools.  The  quality  of  the  care  we 
give  them  determines  the  quality  of  all  our 
futures. 

Of  course,  the  traditional  Right  accords 
some  sort  of  status  to  motherhood,  and  this 
may  appeal,  or  even  seem  reassuring,  to 
some  women.  But  it  is  granted  only  on 
condition  that  we  are  mothers  to  the 
exclusion  of  all  else.  We  must  not  compete 
with  the  men,  must  not-  participate  in  or 
gain  understanding  of  what  takes  place 
outside  our  homes,  and  are  consequently 
unable  to  educate  our  children  in  political 
history.  This  way  the  poor  raise  their  sons 
and  daughters  to  accept  poverty  and 
deprivation,  to  be  exploited  labourers  and 
the  mothers  of  exploited  labourers,  to  take 
pride  in  their  service,  to  be  soldiers. 
Soldiers  and  whores. 

At  Greenham  Common  USAF  base,  in  a 
protest  against  cruise  missiles,  my  six  year 
old  daughter  and  I  stood  amongst  many 
other  women,  facing  the  soldiers  and  the 
fence.  Directly  in  front  of  us  stood  a  row 
of  policemen.  "Is  that  your  child?"  asked 
one  of  them.  "Yes"  I  said,  not  without  a 
touch  of  mother's  pride.  "It's  not  a  very 
good  example  you're  setting  her,  is  it?"  he 
said  disapprovingly  down  his  nose.  I 
answered  that  I  was  giving  her  a  political 
education,  a  lesson  in  active  democracy. 
"Ha"  he  sneered,  and  moved  off.  Smug 
pig.  If  only  his  mother  had  been  able  to 
teach  him  a  thing  or  two  about  power  and 
democracy,  he  might  not  have  been  there, 
at  that  time,  in  that  uniform. 

Discrimination  and  Isolation 

I  hope  I  have  convinced  some  of  you  that 
mothers  are  dedicated  workers  in  a  vital 
industry.  (According  to  the  International 
Labour  Organization,  Western  housewives 
spend  3000  to  4000  hours  each  year  on 
housework  and  family  care.  A  35-hour-a- 
week,  paid,  unionized  job  amounts  to  1,750 
hours  a  year.)  We  have  no  trade  union,  no 
national  pressure  group,  no  representa- 
tives in  Parliament  to  defend  our  interests. 
Decisions  that  affect  our  lives  are  taken  for 
us,  not  by  us,  and  without  any  form  of 
consultation.  This  is  blatant  discrimina- 
tion. But  it  is  not  sexual.  It  doesn't  happen 
because  we  are  women.  It  happens 
because  we  are  childcarers,  and  children 
are  not  catered  for  by  public  life,  or  allowed 
to  be  part  of  it.  In  fact,  the  attitude  of  our 
society  is  Victorian:  children  shouldn't  be 
heard,  and  preferably  not  seen  either.  And 
we  mothers  are  isolated,  barred  from 
uniting  and  organizing,  not  by  any  laws, 
but  by  the  very  nature  of  our  work. 

When  I  first  became  a  mother,  I  didn't 
realize  this.  I  spent  a  lot  of  time  with  both 
my  babies,  very  willingly.  I  felt  it  was 
important  for  us  just  to  sit  around  together, 
play,  fight,  cuddle,  and  share  food,   just 


22 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


like  monkeys  do.  It  was  a  happy  and  per- 
sonally rewarding  thing  to  do.  (If  anyone 
missed  out,  at  that  point,  it  was  my 
husband,  who  had  to  work  long  hours  to 
pay  all  the  bills.  As  he  doesn't  produce 
any  milk  himself,  we  couldn't  swap  roles 
very  well  either.)  But  after  about  9  months, 
a  baby's  need  for  the  company  of  other 
children  becomes  quite  dominant.  (And  a 
mother's  need  for  the  company  of  other 
adults  too!)  To  my  shock  horror  surprise, 
there  was  nowhere  for  either  or  both  of  us 
to  go.  There  are  virtually  no  provisions  for 
under-threes.  Every  activity  has  to  take 
place  within  the  confines  of  somebody's 
flat.  Whatever  facilities  you  can  provide  at 
home  are  quickly  exhausted  by  an  active 
toddler.  Children  who  have  no  neutral 
terrain  on  which  to  meet  become  competi- 
tive and  possessive.  Each  defends  his/her 
sovereignity  over  THEIR  house,  THEIR 
toys,  THEIR  Mom.  Sharing  and  co-opera- 
tion don't  come  naturally  under  these 
circumstances. 

To  get  away  from  all  this,  we  used  to  go 
out  to  the  parks  a  lot.  They  are  so  full  of 
dogshit  that  you  can't  let  a  toddler  crawl 
through  the  grass! 

After  lugging  a  baby  in  a  buggy,  a 
toddler,  two  bags  and  a  box  of  shopping 
along  a  mile  or  two  of  busy  pavement, 
you'd  think  a  woman  would  be  entitled  to  a 
drink,  wouldn't  you?  Well,  we  have  to 
drink  our  pint  on  the  pavement  outside,  in 
the  cold,  noise  and  pollution.  Some 
pub-owners  even  allow  that.  As  soon  as 
you  stick  your  face  in  the  door,  they  tell  you 
to  get  out  because  you  have  a  child  in  your 
arms  that  you  can't  leave  unsupervised 
outside,  not  even  for  a  minute. 

Politics  of  Participation 

But  it's  not  just  public  houses  (pubs)  we 
are  barred  from  — it's  any  public  activity  at 
all.  Public  meetings,  for  instance,  don't 
usually  provide  creches  or  kids'  corners.  So 
they  are  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to 
attend. 

Demonstrations  are  a  trial.  At  a  big 
demo  last  year  there  were  thousands  of  us, 
with  our  babies  and  small  children.  We  had 
to  stand  in  the  cold  and  the  drizzle  in  the 
wet  muddy  park  for  two  hours  while 
various  leading  trade  unionists  gave  long, 
boring  speeches.  Even  when  we  finally  did 
move,  all  the  trade  union  branches  went 
first,  so  we  had  to  wait  some  more.  Now 
this  might  seem  a  tedious  little  complaint 
to  the  uninformed.  But  the  fact  is,  that 
when  a  small  child  falls  over  in  the  mud 
(something  they  do  often),  it  gets  wet.  And 
when  the  child  is  wet  and  stays  out  in  the 
cold,  it  catches  a  cold,  or  worse.  Also 
because  the  children  were  hidden  by  other 
people's  legs  as  they  ran  around,  we  were 
all  dashing  about  trying  to  keep  them  from 


getting  lost.  So  even  as  the  speakers  were 
congratulating  us  on  the  "encouragingly 
large  turnout"  and  thanking  us  for  our 
support,  they  were  making  it  very  difficult 
for  us  to  stay. 

Labour  Party  activists  seem  equally 
unaware  of  the  problems  mothers  have  in 
participating.  This  is  only  my  personal 
experience,  but  I  have  no  reason  to  believe 
it  is  uncommon:  when  I  joined  my  local 
party  branch,  I  became  a  roadsteward. 
Every  month  me  and  the  kids  toddled 
through  the  street,  stuffing  agendas  for 
meetings  through  people's  doors.  Some- 
times people  rang  me  up,  saying:  'I 
couldn't  go  to  the  meeting,  what  hap- 
pened?' I  never  knew.  I  didn't  go  to  a 
single  one  myself.  My  husband  was  out  at 
work  in  the  evenings,  the  kids  were  too 
young  to  be  left  alone,  and  single  friends 
mostly  feel  they  can't  cope  with  two  noisy, 
snotty-nosed,  shitty-diapered,  recalcitrant 
brats,  feed  them,  and  put  them  to  bed. 
No-one  in  my  branch  ever  bothered  to  find 
out  why  I  never  turned  up,  and  after  a  year 
I  stopped  being  a  roadsteward.  After  that, 
the  only  time  anyone  from  the  party 
contacted  me  was  to  ask  me  to  bake  a  cake 
for  a  fund-raising  stall.  Did  they  think  that 
because  I  was  a  mother  and  a  housewife, 
the  only  worthwhile  contribution  I  could 
make  to  politics  was  a  cake?  And  if  this 
isn't  prejudice,  then  what  is? 

Childcare,  Democracy,  and  Socialism 

Children  are  a  natural  part  of  our  lives; 
in  every  aspect  — personal,  private,  social, 
public,  political.  I  would  like  to  make  an 
appeal  to  radicals,  especially  radical  men: 
when  you  organize  a  meeting,  make  sure 
children  can  be  welcome  too.  Do  some 
babysitting.  Provide  some  childcare.  It 
may  not  seem  as  exciting  as  going  to  a 
demo,  raising  funds  for  strikers,  or  making 
speeches.  But  it  is  just  as  relevant. 
Mothers  are  about  12%  of  the  population, 
and  depend  more  than  most  on  a  decent 
level  of  social  services. 

But  if  mothers  find  it  difficult  or 
impossible  to  go  to  meetings,  how  can  we 
discuss  what  is  to  be  done,  how  can  we 
organize  to  protect  our  services,  how  can 
we  take  a  significant  political  action?  Mind 
our  children.  They  belong  to  all  of  us.  Help 
us  defend  ourselves  and  work  for  a  society 
where  there  is  a  more  equal  division  of 
labor  and  resources,  a  juster  distribution  of 
power. 

by  Monica  Slade 


'^^.r,/'*/jz.  *«/ 


m 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


23 


CQIVIPIJTER 
EDUCflTiQI^ 


aoo»*»* 


s  PRQCESSED  KiDS? 


TeRBERT  Kohl  became  famous  in  1968  with  the 
publication  of  86  Children,  the  extraordinary  ac- 

Lcount  of  a  year  he  spent  teaching  sixth  grade  in  a 
"failure  factory"  Harlem,  NY  school.  In  the  book,  Kohl 
describes  how,  confronted  with  the  thirty-six  frus- 
trated, embittered,  often  rebellious  young  people  of  the 
title,  he  set  out  to  reinvent  his  role  as  a  teacher  by 
learning  from  his  students  themselves  what  they 
needed.  He  started  from  the  assumption  that  they  were 
intelligent  human  beings  who  should  be  treated  with 
respect,  rather  than  "bad  apples"  being  confined  to 
the  classroom-jail  until  the  law  released  them  onto  the 
streets  at  age  sixteen.  It  has  been  said  that  revolu- 
tionary discoveries  always  appear  obvious  in  hindsight, 
and  Kohl's  libertarian  approach  to  dealing  with  "hope- 
less" kids  has  proved  to  be  no  exception  to  this 
rule  — nor  to  the  rule  that  such  discoveries,  in  the 
absence  of  the  right  kind  of  social  momentum,  tend  to 
become  truisms  to  which  many  pay  lip-service  but 
which  are  seldom  actually  put  into  practice.  Neverthe- 
less, among  good  teachers— and  there  are  still 
some— Kohl's  name  and  ideas  retain  a  wide  influence. 
Throughout  the  intervening  years.  Kohl  has  con- 
tinued to  fight  for  open,  child-centered  education  in  the 
US,  despite  the  authoritarian  rollback  of  the  80's.  He 
scoffs  at  the  argument,  repeated  ad  nauseum  by  the 
mainstream  media  since  they  discovered  the  "crisis"  of 
American     eduation,     that     "permissive"     or     open 


24 


methods  have  failed.  "The  so-called  open  education 
movement  never  penetrated  more  than  ten  percent  of 
American  public  schools,"  he  says.  "The  failure  of 
American  education  is  the  failure  of  authoritarianism, 
of  rigid  standards  and  stupid  curriculum,  not  the  failure 
of  openness." 

As  he  reveals  in  the  conversation  which  follows.  Kohl 
is  sometimes  bitter  about  the  reactionary  triumph  in 
public  education  circles  over  the  "return"  to  "basics" 
and  "discipline."  But  he  has  not  lost  hope.  Besides 
writing  close  to  twenty  books  (with  more  in  the 
pipeline)  and  innumerable  articles  for  Learning  and 
other  magazines,  he  has  continued  to  teach  children,  to 
train  teachers  and  to  explore  new  approaches  to 
loosening  the  grip  of  bureaucratic  repression  and 
teacher  inertia  on  the  public  schools. 

It  was  in  this  context  that  we  started  to  talk  about 
computer  and  learning.  Kohl  began  by  remarking  with 
some  amusement  that  he  was  something  of  a  Luddite  in 
relation  to  computers.  I  asked  him  what  he  meant. 

What  is  a  Luddite? 

Well,  let's  take  it  historically  first,  then  metaphor- 
ically. It  starts  with  a  bit  of  myth.  This  man  Ned  Ludd 
was  supposedly  a  worker  in  the  first  "rationalised" 
industry— textiles  — during  the  industrial  revolution  in 
Britain  in  the  early  nineteenth  century.  One  day  he 
went  crazy  and  broke  up  all  the  stocking  frames, 
destroyed  the  machinery,  because  he  felt  it  was 
destroying   his   soul.   Mechanization,    remember,   was 

PROCESSED  WORLD  »14 


throwing  traditional  craftspeople  and 
small  farmers  out  of  work  in  huge 
numbers  and  enslaving  them  instead- 
including  children,  by  the  way— to 
sixteen-hour  days  in  the  factories  and  old 
age  at  thirty-five.  Literally.  So  the 
Luddites  were  a  movement  of  industrial 
and  farm  workers  that  got  named  after 
Ned  Ludd  because  they  followed  his 
example.  They  believed  the  industrial 
revolution  was  anti-human,  that  the  new 
machinery  only  functioned  for  the  profit 
of  the  few  and  the  oppression  of  the 
many,  and  should  be  destroyed.  They 
were  trying  to  take  a  stand  against  the 
elimination  of  sensible  decent  human 
work  by  destroying  the  machinery  whose 
use  was  eliminating  that  work.  A  lot  of 
Luddites  also  believed  — and  I  think  in 
this  case  quite  appropriately  — that  these 
machines  destroyed  the  quality  of  hu- 
man work  as  well  as  the  actual  doing  of 
it,  so  that  drudgery  and  shoddy  work- 
manship were  inevitable  consequences 
of  industrialization. 

Well,  the  Luddites  eventually  got 
jailed  and  so  on  and  the  movement  was 
broken.  However— and  this  is  the  intel- 
lectual sense  of  Luddism  which  is  much 
more  where  I'm  coming  from  — there  has 
been  a  tradition  throughout  the  last  125 
years  of  people  who  have  tried  to  take  a 
sensible  view  of  whether  any  given 
technological  innovation  is  beneficial  to 
human  life,  or  whether  it's  detrimental. 
And  if  it's  detrimental,  if  it's  enslaving 
or  otherwise  dangerous,  we  shouldn't  do 
it.  A  perfect  example  of  this  for  me  is 
nuclear  weapons.  They  are  no  defense 
because  if  they  are  ever  used  in  any 
quantity  at  all,  the  human  race  will  be 
wiped  out.  All  they  are  is  a  monstrous 
threat  — to  everyone.  We  simply  do  not 
need  them. 

Industry  and  technology  should  exist 
to  serve  people  — people  do  not  exist  to 
serve  industry  and  technology.  This  is  a 
central  theme  that  has  to  be  elaborated 
in  curriculum,  in  teaching  kids,  and  in 
our  whole  society.  Our  vision  of  the 
future,  of  what  to  do  with  the  knowledge 
we  have,  has  to  do  with  how  we  design 
schools  — with  education.  For  instance, 
the  name  of  the  magazine  Classroom 
Computer  Learning  sounds  like  it's  the 
computers  that  are  learning.  There's  a 
classroom,  and  there  are  computers,  and 
there's  learning,  but  where  are  the  kids? 
And  its  the  kids  that  are  the  future! 
When  you're  teaching  toward  the  future 
you  try  to  make  life  as  rich  as  possible  for 
the  children  in  the  present.  Every  time 
you  make  a  decision  about  what  you 
want  to  change  in  a  curriculum  or  class- 
room, you  ask:  "Does  it  enrich  the  lives 
of  the  people  that  use  it?"  That's  the 


same  perspective  we  have  to  take  in 
looking  at  the  microcomputer. 

So  why  did  you  see  yourself  at  one 
time  as  a  Luddite  in  relation  to 
computers? 

Well,  I  started  working  with  main- 
frame computers  in  1956,  visiting  at  an 
IBM  Research  Center.  Then  I  worked 
quite  a  bit  with  terminals  and  main- 
frames at  the  Lawrence  Hall  of  Science 
in  Berkeley  in  the  late  'sixties  and  early 
seventies.  It  was  all  centralized,  con- 
trolled from  somewhere  else,  to  start 
with.  The  software  was  extremely  rigid, 
it  wasn't  "soft"  except  by  comparison 
with  the  machines  themselves.  Also, 
there  was  no  screen,  of  course— only  a 
printer  and  a  keyboard.  Because  of  the 
many  users  there  was  a  long  wait  time  in 
the  queue,  and  a  short  use  time.  Of 
course,  just  being  an  educational  gim- 
mick in  the  Hall  of  Science,  we  had  very 
low  priority.  Department  of  Defense- 
type  users  could  jump  right  up  the  queue 
over  our  heads.  As  a  consequence  of  all 
this,  interaction  with  the  machine  was 
low  to  nonexistent.  The  machine  actually 
interfered  with  teaching.  It  was  worse 
than  a  textbook  because  at  least  you 
could  have  the  textbook  right  there  as 
long  as  you  wanted.  Kids  asked  me: 
"Why  should  I  learn  this  instead  of 
reading  a  book?" 

What  was  your  answer? 

Well,  at  a  certain  point  I  said:  No 
reason,  unless  you  want  to  go  into 
computer  science,  as  a  career.  For  those 
kids  I  devised  a  course  in  computing  that 
didn't  use  computers  — I  just  developed  a 
lot  of  games  and  simulations  and 
exercises  in  logic,  to  teach  the  ideas  of 
computing. 

Did  your  attitude  change? 

It  began  to  change  in  1980  when  Ted 
Kahn  enticed  me  to  work  at  Atari 
Institute— that  was  the  educational  char- 
ity Atari  set  up  when  they  were  still 
making  big  profits.  It's  folded  now. 
Anyway,  I  started  playing  with  micro- 
computers. To  me,  as  a  teacher,  and  as 
someone  who's  never  grown  up,  who 
designs  games  and  toys  for  children 
because  /  want  to  play  with  them  too  — to 
me  microcomputers  were  magical  tools. 
They  were  the  most  wonderful  game  kit 
you  can  imagine.  For  writing  they  were  a 
tremendously  flexible  way  to  work  and 
refine  and  revise  things.  They  conferred 
the  ability  to  have  not  one  solution  to  a 
problem,  but  a  hundred,  to  create  your 
own  problems  and  challenge  other 
people,  to  share  information  over  com- 


puter networks.  I  also  saw  them  as  tools 
that  people  in  poor  communities  could 
have  access  to,  so  that  they  could  find 
ways  to  organize  information  for  them- 
selves and  counter  the  enormous  data 
bases  that  corporations  and  govern- 
ments use  to  control  them.  That's  when  I 
moved  from  being  a  Luddite  about 
computers  to  being  something  of  an 
enthusiast. 

But  some  things  have  moved  you 
back  in  a  Luddite  direction  again? 

Definitely.  You  see,  the  present  school 
system  perpetuates  what  Jules  Henry 
cals  "educational  stupidity"  — stupidity 
in  a  technical  and  not  a  street  sense. 
Uncritical  thinking,  the  inability  to  ask 
questions,  the  authoritarian  acceptance 
of  things  that  if  examined  turn  out  to  be 
shallow,  hollow,  and  in  many  cases  false. 
This  institutionalization  of  stupidity  in 
the  schools  has  now  begun  to  use  the 
microcomputer  as  its  instrument.  In- 
stead of  being  used  as  paintbrushes, 
music  synthesizers,  tools  of  mathemati- 
cal invention  and  intellectual  exploration 
they  are  being  used  for  the  reproduction 
of  this  morbid  stupidity  and  dullness. 

Can  you  be  specific? 

Sure.  When  I  was  on  the  Board  at 
Atari  Institute,  my  main  job  was  to 
review  hundreds  of  proposals  a  year 
from  schools  all  over  the  country  for 
classroom  computer  use.  I  also  visited 
dozens  of  schools  where  computers  were 
being  used.  The  proponents  we  thought 
were  worthy  were  given  computers 
and/or  cash  with  which  to  implement 
their  proposals.  Most  of  the  proposals 
were  unsolicited,  and  most  of  them  — 
close  to  90%  of  them,  actually  — just 
translated  existing  curriculum  into  elec- 
tronic form.  That  is,  they  fell  into  one  of 
four  categories:  drill  and  practice; 
rewarding  kids  for  doing  boring  work 
with  video  games;  remedial  programs  to 
make  up  for  bad  live  teaching;  and 
"computer  skills"  programs  that  were 
divided  into  "vocational"  use  for  "dull" 
kids  — word  processing  and  data  entry  — 
and  programming  for  "bright"  kids.  So 
not  only  are  they  perpetuating  stupidity 


PROCESSED  WORLD  «14 


25 


and  dullness,  they  are  perpetuating  a 
false  and  unjustifiable  hierarchy  among 
the  students.  There  is  no  known  corre- 
lation between  ability  to  pass  English  or 
Math  tests,  and  ability  to  program 
computers  — yet  most  schools  are  making 
success  in  these  so-called  "basic  skills" 
the  condition  for  computer  access.  It's 
like  saying:  "Until  you  get  straight  A's 
in  Math,  you  can't  take  Music."  Worse 
than  that,  in  many  schools,  such  as  the 
one  my  children  went  to  in  Northern 
California,  Typing  is  an  entry  require- 
ment for  Elementary  Computing:  this 
despite  the  fact  that  typing  ability  has 
nothing  to  do  with  computing.  The 
reason  was  that  they  needed  work  for  the 
typing  teacher  to  do.  He  knew  nothing 


about  computers,  hated  them,  but  he  got 
to  teach  Computing  and  he  was  allowed 
to  make  Typing  an  entry  requirement. 

To  get  back  to  how  the  machines  are 
actually  used  — 

Computers  are  not  being  used  as 
computers,  in  the  same  sense  that  books 
are  not  being  used  as  real  books,  tools 
for  free  enquiry.  Kids  don't  read  books 
in  the  classroom,  they  read  textbooks, 
which  feed  them  bite-sized  chunks  of 
alleged  "facts"  and  "skills"  to  be  swal- 
lowed whole,  regurgitated  at  the  next 
test,  and  forgotten.  That's  what  I  call 
learning  nothing  in  small  increments, 
which  is  the  basis  of  most  American 
public  education.  Now  the  computers  are 


mtti^0mm0mm0mmf^mimmmmfmtmtm0im0mm 


Goofus 


Gallant 


KP«MP«ta 


Fun  with  a  Purpose     I 

Zoe  Noe 


being  used  as  textbooks  and  workbooks, 
with  rigid  software  that  tries  to  enforce 
the  same  ritualistic  rote  acceptance  of 
thmgs  that  kids  don't  believe,  don't 
comprehend,  or  don't  care  about.  "Drill 
and  practice"  is  a  very  simple  way  of 
saying  that  microcomputers  in  class- 
rooms are  being  used  to  shore  up  a 
system  that  doesn't  work  if  you  believe 
in  democracy,  that  doesn't  nurture  the 
children  who  are  its  users.  Everyone 
talks  about  micros  being  user-friendly, 
but  right  now  they  are  not  friends  of  the 
users.  They  treat  the  users  as  passive 
victims. 

Then  they  pat  them  on  the  head 
electronically  now  and  again... 

The  kids  tell  me  that  M&M's  are 
better  than  the  computer  throwing  a 
couple  of  colors  on  the  screen  and 
playing  "It's  Howdy  Doody  Time"  or 
"The  Star  Spangled  Banner."  It's  a  very 
inhuman  notion  of  reward.  Even  for  a 
pigeon  — if  you  want  a  pigeon  to  play 
ping-pong,  that's  totally  dysfunctional 
for  the  pigeon.  So  you  have  to  reward 
the  pigeon  more  and  more  to  get  it  to  do 
the  same  task.  If  classroom  tasks  remain 
completely  boring,  they  have  to  be 
rewarded  in  a  more  and  more  interesting 
way.  Let  them  play  a  few  video  games 
after  all  the  drill  and  practice.  Pure  and 
simple  bribery.  But  the  bribes  don't 
work  because  we  live  in  an  inflationary 
culture,  and  so  you  hvae  to  up  the  bribe 
while  the  intelligence  required  stays  on 
the  same  low  level,  and  there's  no 
learning. 

This  is  where  Luddism  in  the  original 
sense  comes  in.  Kids  who  enjoy  playing 
piano  would  never  dream  of  breaking  the 
strings.  Kids  who  love  to  read  consider 
defacing  books  a  tragic  act.  Kids  who 
love  what  they're  doing  honor  the  instru- 
ment and  tools  and  materials  they  use. 
Conversely,  kids  who  hate  what  they're 
doing,  break  'em.  If  computers  become 
instruments  of  torture  in  the  schools  — 
because  boredom  is  torture  to  young 
minds,  that's  why  so  many  of  them  hate 
school  so  much  — we  can  expect  to  see 
them  treated  in  a  Luddite  manner. 
Broken.  Short-circuited.  And  computers 
are  so  fragile  that  that's  incredibly  easy 
to  do.  Like  what  happened  to  the 
"talking  typewriters,"  the  Edison  Res- 
ponsive Environment  teaching  ma- 
chines, in  the  early  'seventies.  I  know  of 
a  school  where  the  kids  loved  to  screw  up 
the  teachers'  programs  — jam  them,  put 
in  a  false  code,  everything  they  could  to 
make  them  inoperable.  Which  meant 
that  computers  were  inoperable  in  the 
lives  of  those  children.  Now,  there  are 
some  teachers   who   really  care  — some 


26 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


who  not  only  care  but  know,  and  some 
who  don't  know,  but  care  enough  to 
explore  along  with  their  kids.  In  those 
places  computers  are  considered  pre- 
cious, like  paints  and  brushes  in  a  good 
art  class. 

What  do  you  think  about  the  role  of 
computers  in  the  lives  of  primary- 
age  children? 

I  don't  think  any  five-,  six-,  or  seven- 
year-old  should  have  anything  to  do  with 
computers  except  in  a  totally  informal 
way.    They    should    be    children,    thev 

bfc  IN  SCHOOL 

NOW,  CLASS,  tJHO  CAK) 
TELL   fAE   THE   PURPOSE 
OF  UJHAT  U)£  HAVE 
LG.ARNiEC?  TOPA^^ 


should  live  in  a  physical  world— the 
world  of  objects  and  music  and  liveli- 
ness—as much  as  possible.  Everybody 
talks  about  computers  developing  cogni- 
tive and  small  motor  skills  because  kids 
can  use  the  joystick  and  push  the  button 
real  fast  to  shoot  down  Russian  rockets. 
But  in  the  last  four  years  I've  been  to 
schools  all  over  the  country  — San  Anto- 
nio, Chicago,  Minneapolis,  New  York 
City  — and  what  I've  seen  is  kids  who  are 
afraid  to  go  into  the  playground  and  run! 
Kids  who  don't  know  how  to  build 
houses  with  blocks  because  all  thev've 


from  LOVE  IS  HELL  by  Matt  Greening,  P.O.  Box  36E64,  Los  Angeles,  CA  90036,  $6.95  -t-  $2  postage  &  handling. 
PROCESSED  WORLD  m  27 


ever  done  is  push  buttons  to  build 
structures  on  the  computer  screen.  Little 
children  who  are  terribly  afraid  of  other 
little  children  because  they've  spent  all 
their  lives  in  front  of  the  computer  and 
don't  understand  what  it  is  to  share  a 
game  or  build  communal  lives  with  their 
peers. 

I've  also  seen  young  children  who 
believe  they  have  to  be  adults.  It's 
ridiculous!  Five-year  olds  don't  have  to 
be  adults,  they  don't  have  to  prepare 
for  jobs!  We  should  honor  their  youth 
and  give  them  a  place  to  grow  and  be 
happy.  Then  they  might  be  decent 
adults. 

As  it  is,  too-early  use  of  computer  and 
TV  are  combining  to  produce  a  desocial- 
ization  of  American  children  that's 
terrifying.  If  you  take  a  child  and 
parcellize  her  life  so  that  half  the  time 
she's  with  the  computer  and  the  other 
half  she's  watching  TV,  what  you  get  is  a 
non-human  being. 


The  role  of  the  teacher  then  would  not 
be  to  wear  a  white  coast  and  manage  the 
system  and  make  sure  it  doesn't  get 
broken.  It  would  be  to  help  the  kids 
articulate  sensible  problems  that  they 
were  interested  in  and  wanted  to  solve, 
and  give  them  a  path  into  the  system 
from  which  they  could  get  a  wider  and 
wider  sense  of  which  knowledge  comes 
to  bear  on  the  problem  that  they  them- 
selves have  learned  to  articulate. 

For  example? 

Take  the  question:  "Why  doesn't  the 
earth  come  out  of  its  orbit?"  I  look  up 
under  "Earth,"  then  "orbit"  then 
"Why?".  I  get  a  picture  on  the  screen  of 
the  earth  in  orbit.  It  says:  "How  fast  do 
you  want  it  to  go?"  That's  the  beauty  of 
the  computer.  I  can  control  the  shape  of 
the  earth's  orbit,  the  speed,  its  mass  and 
the  sun's  mass,  the  force  of  gravity  — and 
by  varying  these  things,  I  can  find  out 
the  point  at  which  the  earth  flips  out  of 


industry,  or  very  well-to-do.  It's  not  a 
large-scale  phenomenon. 

The  main  problem  at  this  level  in  the 
schools  I'm  familiar  with  is  that  the 
computer  teachers  always  find  one  or 
two  of  these  kids  who  are  self-taught  or 
whose  parents  are  in  the  industry,  and 
who  know  much  more  than  the  teachers 
do.  These  kids  are  hardly  ever  used  as 
the  real  teachers:  they're  seen  as 
threats.  The  halfway  decent  teacher  will 
get  them  out  of  the  classroom  by  finding 
them  special  training,  the  indecent 
teacher  will  get  them  out  of  the 
classroom  as  "discipline  problems." 
Real  knowledge  of  computers  is  not  very 
often  available  in  the  school  system 
because  most  teachers  and  administra- 
tors are  scared  to  death  of  them,  just  like 
the  average  citizen  is  scared  to  death  of 
them. 

So  the  kids  know  more  than  the 
teachers,  if  they  know  anything.  And  if 
they  don't  know  anything,   they   don't 


...   too-early   use  of  computer  and   TV  are  combining  to  produce  a 
desocialization  of  American  children  that's  terrifying.  .  . 


What  about  middle-school  age? 

Eight  to  twelve  years  old  is  when  I 
would  start  introducing  what  I  call 
"utilities."  Things  like  word  processors 
used  the  way  Teachers  and  Writers 
Collaborative  in  New  York  used  them  — 
the  kids  each  select  their  best  piece  of 
writing  for  the  month,  put  it  on  a  disc, 
then  have  all  their  classmates  review  it 
and  file  helpful  suggestions  about  it. 
Then  each  of  them  revises  their  own 
piece  using  the  suggestions,  and  every- 
body together  selects  type  styles  and 
develops  graphics  and  they  put  it  all 
together  and  print  a  magazine.  Also 
mathematical  investigation  programs  in 
which  you  can  do  all  kinds  of  drawing  to 
help  you  with  problem-solving  — "sup- 
posers"  is  what  Judy  Schwartz  at  MIT 
calls  them,  like  algebraic  supposers  and 
geometric  supposers.  Introduce  artistic 
drawing  programs.  Have  kids  create 
their  own  data  bases.  I  would  not  have 
the  programs  structured  so  the  kids  start 
here  and  go  there.  I  would  have  an 
enormous,  amorphous  world  filled  with 
learning  that  the  kids  can  have  access  to 
and  make  their  own  maps  of.  That  way 
they  can  begin  to  understand  how  to 
build  structures  of  knowledge  and  use 
them  for  their  own  creative  purposes, 
which  is  crucial  in  the  development  of 
the  intellect. 


orbit  in  terms  of  each  of  these  variables. 
There's  no  better  exercise  in  algebra  in 
the  world.  To  take  another  question: 
"Where  did  the  english  language  come 
from?"  The  computer  asks  me  to  be 
more  specific.  I  give  it  a  word  and  it  tells 
me  the  origin.  Then  I  start  a  data  base 
listing  the  words  by  origin  — Latin, 
Greek,  Anglo-Saxon,  Nordic,  French.  I 
graph  numbers  of  words  by  origin,  so 
that  I  begin  to  see  relative  weights.  Then 
it  says:  "Do  you  want  to  go  deeper?" 
Which  means  the  Indo-European  roots  of 
the  word.  From  there  I  could  go  back  up, 
making  trees.  I  begin  to  get  a  sense  of 
the  complexity  of  linguistic  development 
—  a  linguistic  geology. 

It  would  be  simple  to  do  that.  But  what 
they're  doing  mostly  in  this  age  group  is 
drill  and  practice.  It's  like  using  a 
thousand-dollar  computer  as  a  ten-dollar 
calculator:  it's  a  trivialization  of  the 
technology. 

How  about  junior  high  and  high 
schools? 

There  is  no  question  that  by  that  age, 
kids  can  be  very,  very  sophisticated  with 
computers.  There  are  some  secondary 
schools  where  kids  use  them  the  way  you 
or  I  would  use  the  phone.  Unfortunately, 
these  schools  tend  to  be  in  places  where 
a  lot  of  the  parents  are  in  the  computer 


want  to  go  through  another  empty 
learning  process.  They  are  sick  and  tired 
of  what  schools  have  done  to  them.  They 
don't  want  anything  new  because  to 
them  it's  the  same  old  package  with  new 
colors  on  it:  "Test  me,  judge  me,  put  me 
through  drill  and  practice,  but  I'm  not 
going  to  get  anything  exciting  or  useful 
for  my  life  out  of  it."  The  most  amazing 
phenomenon  of  American  secondary 
education  is  its  ability  to  make  Mozart, 
mathematics,  Norman  Mailer,  and  the 
creation  of  cornmeal  all  the  same.  Make 
them  into  — into  cornmeal  mush!  The 
most  interesting  things  in  the  world 
become  equally  and  unambiguously 
boring.  And  now  they're  doing  the  same 
thing  with  computers.  The  idea  behind 
this  whole  style  of  schooling  is  that  if  we 
give  the  kids  any  freedom,  they'll  waste 
their  time  and  they  won't  do  what 
they're  supposed  todo.  So  we  have  to 
bludgeon  them  into  learning.  There's  a 
complete  lack  of  belief  in  the  imagina- 
tion, a  complete  lack  of  trust  in  young 
people.  They're  treated  as  fugitives  from 
the  justice  of  learning. 

Are    things    any    better    at    college 
level? 

That's  where  some  of  the  most 
interesting  and  creative  stuff  is  being 
done.   In  the  places   I've  been  to,   like 


28 


PROCESSED  WORLD  «14 


Brown  and  Carnegie-Mellon,  and  U  of  M 
at  Ann  Arbor,  the  computers  being  used 
by  students  as  another  tool  for  research 
or  personal  exploration  of  all  kinds  of 
data  bases  of  other  people's  work.  It's 
giving  them  the  ability  to  record  and 
process  documents,  to  do  sketching  and 
drawing  and  dimensioning.  In  fact,  the 
way  computers  are  used  in  college  is  the 
way  they  should  be  used  in  sixth  grade. 
Why  should  college  students  have  the 
privilege  of  doing  things  well  and  freely 
while  sixth-graders  are  enslaved  to  drill 
and  practice? 

What  do  you  think  is  the  relationship 
between  computer  skills  and  jobs? 

Very  few  people  are  needed  to  do  the 
creative  work  in  the  computer  world,  in 
either  hardware  or  software  — designing 
the  systems,  the  chips,  and  so  on.  For 
the  rest,  they  need  a  few  programmers, 
a  few  maintenance  people  — and  com- 
puter maintenance  now  just  means 
pulling  a  chip  out  and  putting  another  in, 
it's  far  less  skilled  than  installing  for  the 
phone  company  — and  some  janitors  to 
keep  everything  shiny  and  dust-free.  We 
don't  even  need  people  to  make  the 
chips  here  because  we've  got  teenage 
girls  doing  it  for  pennies  a  day  in  South 
Korea,  Taiwan,  the  Philippines,  El 
Salvador.  What  else?  Secretaries.  Data 
entry  clerks.  Everything  I've  read  es- 
sentially says  that  even  if  on  occasion  it 
leads  to  the  illusion  of  creating  jobs,  the 
computer  industry  is  actually  creating  an 
unbelievable  lack  of  need  for  people.  The 
whole  drive  is  toward  what  they  call 
"expert  systems,"  [See  "Mind  Games 
in  PW  #13]  and  the  more  expert  systems 
you  have,  the  fewer  live  experts  you 
need,  let  alone  the  less  skilled  people. 
I've  already  seen  kids,  good  program- 
mers who  have  just  graduated  high 
school,  and  who  find  that  there  are 
twenty  people  ahead  of  them  for  every 
job  available.  The  Computer  Engineer- 
ing departments  are  telling  them: 
"Don't  bother." 

So  it's  an  absolute  lie  to  say  to  kids: 
"You  have  to  learn  computers  so  you  can 
get  a  job."  I  would  tell  them  they're 
probably  better  off  learning  music  or  the 
arts,  or  how  to  build  a  house,  or  drive  a 
bus,  because  these  are  services  that 
people  will  always  need  — unless  of 
course  there's  so  much  unemployment 
that  people  can't  afford  to  pay  for  them! 
The  problem  of  employment  and  com- 
puters is  the  problem  of  employment, 
period.  Learning  computing  will  not 
solve  this  problem  either  for  the  indivi- 
dual or  for  society. 


But  aren't  computers  becoming  such 
a  pervasive  fact  of  modern  life  that 
everybody  ought  to  be  computer 
literate? 

I  don't  think  everybody  needs  to 
become  computer  literate  anymore  than 
evrybody  needs  to  be  airline  piloting 
literate,  or  bricklaying  literate,  or  astro- 
physics literate.  I  think  everybody 
should  be  politics  and  Constitution  and 
union  and  human  rights  literate,  because 
you  need  to  understand  the  things  that 
affect  your  life.  You  can  be  computer 
literate  in  terms  of  knowing  how  to 
program  in  Basic— or  in  machine  lan- 
guage, for  that  matter  — and  still  not 
know  a  thing  about  how  computers  are 
used  to  regulate  you,  or  their  effects  on 
society.  For  most  people,  learning  Basic 
is  like  learning  to  divide  by  fractions, 
which  I  haven't  done  since  I  left  sixth 
grade,  and  I  have  a  degree  in  Mathe- 
matical Logic!  What  everyone  does  need 
to  be  is  computer  sociology  and  politics 
literate.  That  stuff  should  be  taught  in 
Twentieth-Century  History,  in  your  Se- 
nior year— "Problems  of  American  Dem- 
ocracy," I  call  it. 

So  where  is  this  computer  education 
boom  coming  from? 

Well,  partly  from  the  creation  of  a  new 
teaching  profession  and  a  new  bureau- 
cracy which  controls  the  new  credentials 
and  degrees  for  those  teachers  — "Mas- 
ter Teacher  in  Computing,"  "Master  of 
Computer  Education,"  "Master  of  Com- 
puting Arts"  and  all  the  restof  that  crap. 
Then  the  teachers  go  back  into  the 
schools  to  take  over  the  computers  under 
the  pretense  that  the  students  will  get 
jobs,  when  you  know  most  of  them 
won't. 

I  think  it's  outrageous  to  require 
computer  literacy  so  that  people  who 
don't  need  or  want  it  won't  graduate 
from  high  school  and  will  be  penalized  in 
their  lives  for  not  caring  about  it.  It's  the 
flip  side  of  denying  computer  access  to 
kids  who  do  want  it  because  their  grades 
are  too  low  in  English  or  Typing.  A 
perfect  example  is  my  eldest  daughter, 
who  fortunately  has  already  graduated. 
She's  a  painter  and  she  wants  nothing  to 
do  with  computers.  But  she's  not 
crippled  in  any  way  by  that,  and  if  she 
wants  that  knowledge,  she  can  discover 
it.  Everyone  says  now  that  if  you  aren't 
taught  something  like  computers  or 
mathematics  when  you're  real  young, 
you'll  never  learn  it.  That's  like  saying 
that  if  you  don't  learn  how  to  drive  a  car 
when  you're  six,  you'll  never  learn  when 
you're  sixteen.  The  fact  is,  you  can  learn 
everything  you  need  to  know  about 
handling    a    computer    in    three    weeks 


when  you're  thirty,  two  weeks  when 
you're  fifteen,  and  maybe  three  days 
when  you're  eleven  or  twelve.  It  isonly  in 
the  interests  of  the  computer  industry 
and  the  computer  education  establish- 
ment to  force  everybody  to  do  compu- 
ting. It  is  not  in  the  interests  of  the 
children. 

But  you  talked  earlier  in  pretty 
glowing  terms  about  what  could  be 
done  with  computers  in  schools. 

Sure.  That's  not  the  same  as  forcing 
everyone  to  learn  computer  science, 
though. 

Then  what  skills  can  best  be  learned 
through  computer  use?  What  else 
are  they  really  good  for  in  schools? 

Well,  to  summarize  — simulating  a 
complex  process  or  a  situation  you 
couldn't  possibly  live  through.  Experi- 
menting with  multiple  solutions  and 
getting  feedback  on  your  mistakes  that  is 
not  just  one-dimensional  straight  an- 
swers but  hints  and  clues  that  lead  in  a 
hundred  directions.  Producing  visual 
representations  of  your  work  you  can 
play  with.  Creating  your  own  relation- 
ships between  data.  Generating  whole 
class  newspapers  and  magazines,  com- 
plete with  graphics.  Setting  up  electronic 
mailboxes  and  using  networks  to  get  in 
touch  with  other  kids  in  other  parts  of  the 
country  and  the  world.  Those  are  all 
capabilities  eminently  worth  having. 
And  kids  can  begin  playing  with  them 
around  eight  to  ten  years  old.  The  little 
ones  should  simply  do  it  in  their  lives,  in 
their  fantasies.  You  need  an  active  mind 
first,  then  the  interactive  machine  can 
enrich  the  active  mind.  That's  the  magic. 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


29 


r^ 

i^^^VfSiXn_    ^ggapg^ip- 

ISSt^. 

1 

m 

••<2;l:.;v3T 

;i<??! 


^':c: 


^ie^>r 


M~H  H    ■■■■■■ 


J^  |/c»-kEE^ 


A  'Play  System'  for  Modular  Thinking 


Translator's  Introduction 


1  HE  Germans  strike  again?  Maybe  it's  the  legacy 
of  too  much  Critical  Theory,  too  much  Marx,  too 
much  Hegel,  too  much  Kant  (or  cant?].  Maybe 
it's  the  lousy  weather. 

Whatever:  this  edited-down  translation  of  a  piece  by 
Imma  Harms,  which  originally  appeared  in  the  West 
German  ecological  magazine  Wechsel-Wirkung  [Gnei- 
senaustr.  2,  D-1000,  Berlin],  tells  us  some  truths  about 
how  "innocent"  toys  can  be  used  as  seductive  tools  of 
social  control  and  forced  socialization. 

But  something  about  the  piece  did  not  sit  right;  in 
fact,  two  things.  One:  children  have  two  genders.  Do 
girls  play  with  LEGO  and  such  things  differently  than 
boys?  When  a  girl  puts  down  a  doll  and  picks  up  a 
LEGO  piece  on  her  way  to  constructing  some  sort  of 
flying/digging/moving/living/talking  thing  — does  this 
mean  something  different  than  when  a  boy  does  it? 
Mebbe  so.  (What  was  that  computer  programmers' 
sister  up  to,  anyhow?)  The  old  norms  say,  girls  don't 
build;  they  take  care  of  the  builder  when  he  falls  down. 
LEGO  can  be  an  instrument  of  revolt  against  an  old 
norm. 

Two:  The  author  just  begins  to  get  at  this  at  the  end, 
but  it  needs  more  emphasis:  playing  with  toys  (or  just 
living)  in  a  world  made  up  of  abstracted  roles  and 
empty  rules  does  not  automatically  produce  empty  and 
abstracted  people.  At  least  there  is  no  guarantee  that 
that  will  happen.  Kids  can  play  with  LEGO,  and  then 


they  go  out  and  squat  houses,  close  down  nuclear 
power  plants,  give  stony  greetings  to  the  likes  of 
George  Bush,  etc. 

Ohne  Zukunft  for  ever— The  Datadybbuk 

The  West  German  government  is  worried  about  its 
citizens'  stubbornly  bad  attitude  towards  hi-tech.  It  still 
looks  like  lots  of  people  don't  want  to  believe  that  their 
future  is  tied  to  data  processing  and  microelectronics, 
"in  prosperity  and  hard  times,"  as  the  Club  of  Rome 
put  it.  So  the  conservative  Christian  Democratic  regime 
has  begun  to  plan  a  cultural  offensive  aimed  at 
"motivating  people"  to  deal  with  the  new  information 
and  communication  technologies,  beginning  with  the 
elementary  school  system. 

This  doesn't  mean  that  every  child  should  learn 
BASIC  as  their  first  foreign  language.  The  state  is 
much  more  concerned  with  the  basics  as  a  whole,  of 
preparing  the  next  generation  for  the  "insertion  of 
information  technology  systems  into  different  areas  of 
life  and  work."  According  to  the  government,  success 
in  the  future  requires  a  "systematic  application"  of  the 
"basic  principles"  of  the  new  information  order— "dig- 
ital information  ordering,  the  translation  of  real 
activities  into  a  machine-readable  program"— at  the 
elementary  school  level. 

Finding  Beauty  in  the  Abstract 

What  are  these  basic  principles,  then? 

Seymour  Papert,  in  considering  the  question  in  his 


30 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


book,  Children,  Computers  and  the  New 
Learning,  gives  us  some  illuminating 
glimpses  of  what's  in  store.  Papert  takes 
the  work  of  the  Swiss  child  development 
psychologist,  Jean  Piaget,  and  turns  it  on 
its  head.  Piaget  distinguishes  between  a 
child's  acquisition  of  "concrete"  and 
"formal"  thinking.  According  to  Piaget's 
logic,  a  child  is  taught  only  "concrete 
thinking"  in  the  early  years,  thinking  that 
is  visual,  qualitative  and  directly  linked  to 
the  sensuous  world.  Only  later,  when  a 
child  begins  school,  does  Piaget  suggest 
the  introduction  of  more  abstract  or 
"formal  thinking,"  thinking  that  is  analy- 
tic, quantitative,  mediated. 

With  the  arrival  of  the  computer  on  the 
scene,  rejoices  Papert,  it  is  now  possible  to 
organize  "formal  thinking"  so  that  child- 
ren who  are  still  at  the  age  during  which 
they  learn  intuitively,  spontaneously  and 
through  direct  perception,  swallow  it  down 
as  "concrete  thinking."  When  other 
children  learn  "that  is  a  tree,  this  is  a 
green,  that  is  hot,"  Papert's  children 
would  learn,  "Right  90-SQ/Right  30/TRL/ 
at  completion  come  to  a  house."  This  is  a 
style  of  thinking  in  which  every  perception 
is  fragmented  into  programmable  units.  It 
is  to  take  place  at  the  point  of  a  child's 
development,  according  to  Papert's  re- 
working of  Piaget,  where  "an  intuitive 
science  of  quantity  and  system  would  be 
erected."  Children,  writes  Papert,  would 
learn  "to  find  beauty  in  the  abstract." 

It's  no  surprise  that  many  [German] 
parents,  including  those  in  the  "progres- 
sive left,"  worry  about  the  connection 
between  computers  and  their  kids.  "What 
kind  of  relationship  is  this,"  writes  one 
parent,  where  opposite  the  child  is  a  thing 
"without  voice,  without  face,  without  age, 
without  sex,  without  a  fate,  without  smell, 
without  body,  an  ever-emotionless  slave  of 
reason.  .  .  Does  one  learn  rational  self- 
discipline  or  in  the  long  run  does  one  learn 
self-destruction,  the  expulsion  of  all  per- 
sonal feelings  in  every  realm  of  production 
and  social  life?" 

But  why  are  these  same  parents  so  naive 
when  it  comes  to  other,  much  older 
methods  for  producing  Papert's  children? 
Every  kid's  room  is  filled  with  them.  The 
most  modern  toys  — one  can  only  call  them 
"playing  systems"  — carry  the  imprint  of 
the  computer  culture. 

The  Unbounded  World  of  a   "Play 
System' 

The  classic  and  most  widely  distributed 
is  LEGO.  It  does  exactly  what  Papert 
wants:  a  world  — the  world  — gets  built  out 
of  standardized  units.  The  concrete  is  syn- 
thesized out  of  the  formal.  And  if  at  times  it 
only  has  a  vague  connection  to  real   life. 


nonetheless  the  child  learn  that  the  more 
abstract  the  building  block,  the  more 
varied  things  can  be  built. 

Not  coincidentally,  LEGO  advertising 
makes  remarkably  similar  points  to  Pa- 
pert's call  for  kiddie  computers.  Individual 
LEGO  pieces  "represent  nothing  in  them- 
selves, but  assembled  they  can  represent 
anything  under  the  sun  — and  more!  The 
boundary  is  set  by  the  limitless  imagina- 
tion of  the  child."  So  says  LEGO.  Papert 
writes  that  "there  are  an  infinite  number  of 
possible"  shapes  that  a  child  could 
program  onto  a  computer  screen,  but  each 
time  they  would  learn  "to  exercise  control 
of  this  incredibly  rich  'microworld.'  " 

Fifty  million  children  in  125  countries 
play  with  the  colored  knobby  blocks,  but 
this  unusually  successful  toy  didn't  dev- 
elop out  of  normal  kid's  building  blocks. 
The  Danish  firm  that  makes  LEGO  toys 
used  to  build  only  wooden  toys,  mostly 
trucks,  until  the  second  World  War.  The 
plastic  "bricks"  were  the  trucks'  cargo. 
After  the  war,  these  injection-molded 
blocks  were  expanded  into  a  "play 
system"  accompanied  by  a  lavish  adver- 
tising budget  and  the  full  repertoire  of 
modern  mass  marketing  techniques. 
Throughout  Europe  children  fell  in  love 
with  "LEGO  — a  system  for  playing,"  as  it 
was  described. 

The  clean,  interlocking  blocks,  the 
smooth    walls,    the    totally    rational    toy 


seemed  to  satisfy  something  in  the  children 
(or  was  it  their  parents?)  that  made  LEGO 
more  than  a  fad.  The  toy's  message  sank 
in:  if  one  piece  was  missing,  it  was 
exasperating.  Either  the  construction  was 
perfect,  or  it  was  botched.  A  computer 
programmer  explained  to  me  that,  as  a 
child,  he  always  used  to  get  angry  when  his 
sister  used  the  different  colored  LEGO 
pieces  without  any  logic  to  it,  mixing  up  the 
colors  wildly.  He  always  put  them  "in 
order"  afterward. 

The  Cultural  Heritage 

Writes  one  child  psychologist:  "A  toy  is 
an  important  tool  for  education  and 
training,  in  which  the  child  gets  the  feel  of 
the  cultural  heritage  of  his  or  her  time." 

What  does  a  child  learn  with  LEGO,  and 
what  are  they  supposed  to  learn? 


US. 

FANTRY 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


31 


U.S.ARMY.t 


BALLISTIC 
MISSILE 


OVER 

3  FEET 

lALL 


Ci 


U.S.ARMY 


BALLISTIC 
MlSSJjjI 


It's  not  just  that  it's  easier  to  put  the 
blocks  together  with  LEGO  than  with  other 
similar  toys.  It's  also  that  there  is  no  choice 
but  to  put  the  blocks  together:  one  can  do 
no  more  than  build  in  this  "orderly"  sense. 
The  knobs  on  the  top  of  one  fit  into  the  base 
of  the  next;  smooth  walls,  sharp  diagonals, 
square  forms  get  built.  With  LEGO,  to 
build  means  to  build  according  to  exact 
rules.  It  doesn't  feel  like  a  constraint, 
because  the  rules  are  built  into  the  blocks 
themselves;  the  rules  were  fixed  once  and 
for  all  in  the  production  process.  What  is 
experienced  "at  play"  is  what's  left  within 
these  boundaries.  The  modeling  of  the  real 
world  during  playtime  is  thus  made  into  an 
improved  multiple  choice  test. 

The  Modular  Technique 

LEGO  also  embodies  a  principle  of 
construction  based  on  the  use  of  modular 
building  elements.  With  standardized 
building  pieces,  it  doesn't  matter  if  what  is 
being  built  is  a  garage,  a  helicopter,  a  cow. 
Piece  after  piece  is  stuck  together,  every- 
thing gets  bricked  up.  This  technique, 
based  on  the  module,  the  dominant  charac- 
teristic in  all  parts  of  society.  It  is  the 
"cultural  heritage"  within  which  children 
play,  when  they  play  with  LEGO. 

We  find  this  technique  in  housing  con- 
struction based  on  prefabricated  materials, 
in  all  modern  equipment  manufacture,  in 
containerized  freight,  and  in  an  especially 
pure  form  in  software  techniques  and 
complex  programming  systems.  Here,  the 
module  is  a  necessity;  nothing  happens 
without  it.  The  parallel  is  astonishing. 

The  great  advantage  of  modular  tech- 
nology is  that  "it  constructs  out  of 
components  what  they  all  have  in  common 
—  they  can  be  combined,  taken  apart,  and 
put  back  together  in  a  new  form."  That's 
how  LEGO  is  advertised. 

"Through  the  step-by-step  assembly  of 
components  and  the  use  of  existing  ones, 
new  levels  of  abstraction  emerge.  The  raw 
material  for  the  creation  of  the  elementary 
components,"  (LEGO  advertisers  would 
complete  this  sentence)  "is  developed  out 
of  synthetic  plastics."  However,  this  is  not 
LEGO  advertising  copy,  but  from  an  essay 
discussing  a  complex  programming  lan- 
guage called  ELAN.  The  sentence  contin- 
ues, "The  raw  material  for  the  creation  of 
the  elementary  components  are  objects  and 
structures  of  program  languages  now  in 
use." 

Modular  technology  precedes  system 
programming.  One  lecture  about  data 
structures  and  programming  notes  that  it  is 
best  to  "employ  the  established  principle 
that  from  a  few  simple  components,  based 
on  a  few,  well-thought  out  assembly 
options,  complex  structures  can  be  erect- 


ed." LEGO'S  top  managers  could  have  said 
the  same  thing. 

Or  this:  "Modern  modular  systems  are 
based  upon  a  system  of  building  blocks. 
The  user  can  locate  the  desired  parts,  and, 
according  to  his  production  requirements, 
put  them  together  into  a  total  system." 
This  is  not  about  toys,  but  the  use  of 
"modular  programs  for  industrial  produc- 
tion systems." 

The  basic  parallel  is  in  the  underlying 
logic,  namely,  that  with  an  appropriate 
basic  component  — here  a  programming 
language,  there  a  knobbed  building  block 
—  every  problem  can  be  solved,  every 
figure  constructed.  In  computer  program- 
ming, reality  is  seen  through  the  frame  of 
numerical  logic  and  the  languages  built  on 
it;  in  playing  with  LEGO,  reality  is  seen 
through  the  frame  of  the  "language"  and 
logic  of  the  standard  LEGO  block. 

The  future  needs  these  kinds  of  people! 
A  society  of  programmers.  That  is  what 
children  who  play  with  LEGO  learn.  They 
not  only  build  with  modules,  they  become 
modules  — that  interlock,  like  the  little 
wheels  inside  an  old  mechanical  calculator. 


/iun;J- 


Breaking  Through  the  Module: 
Bringing  the  Pieces  Together 

"A  toy,"  writes  Bernhard  Kroner,  is  a 
"symbol  of  the  required  ways  of  behavior. 
In  thise  sense,  a  toy  is  a  means  of  social 
control."  The  question  is,  what  would 
protection  against  the  mis-use  of  formal 
logic  look  like?  The  protection  lies  partly  in 
the  nature  of  the  real  world.  Ours  is  a  world 
of  quality,  of  the  unique,  of  the  imprecise 
and  the  contradictory.  The  real  world  is  a 
world  of  continuity,  and  of  the  inconceiv- 
able. 


32 


PROCESSED  WORLD  »14 


Ordering  this  chaos  through  a  logic  of  quantity  and 
system  is  only  one  possibility;  and  the  result  is  an 
artificial  world. 


tiii*»t»iitiitiiiita»ttttf»»0**tit»*»at«a«*ms!tiis«»t!t 


t*zsii*mi>tii«*iiiii 


Ordering  this  chaos  through  a  logic  of 
quantity  and  system  is  only  one  possibility; 
and  the  result  is  an  artificial  world. 

A  child  finds  all  these  worlds  inside 
worlds  mixed  together.  She  will  find 
elements  of  chaos,  and  elements  for  its 
mastery,  whole  layers  of  different  cultures 
and  of  technologies.  Everything  leaves  its 
traces,  its  "cultural  heritage"  of  the  time. 
A  child  can  choose  and  bring  together  what 
is  important  to  her,  what  seems  to  belong 


together.  A  child  can  break  down  old 
connections,  and  make  new  ones.  This  is 
her  own  source  of  autonomy. 

Somewhere  in  all  this,  LEGO  finds  its 
place.  For  certain,  there  isone  thing  that  we 
can  do  better  with  LEGO  than  just  about  any 
other  toy:  build  walls. 


—  by  Imma  Harms 
translated  by  The  Datadybbuk 


THE  WORLD...  OF  THE  IMPRECISE  & 


LU 


UJ 

o 


-NOONI  3H1  ^  AlinNllNOO  dOD 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


THE  COWL  OF  MONDAY 


/  did  not  expect  to  see  the  sun  rise  today 
I  expected  to  see  a  thousand  blue  owls 
Flying  through  the  rain 
Coming  to  blanket  me  with  gloom  and  silence 
And  veils  of  an  aged  dream 

Instead  I  see  gold  light  on  the  bricks 

The  song  of  the  sparrow  dripping  from  new  leaves 

The  streets  vivid  with  young  shadows 

Thin  columns  of  mist  still  linger 
From  the  haunted  landscapes  of  sleep 
Slowly,  the  morning  rituals  unfold  themselves 
From  my  hands:  uncertain  of  my  faith 
In  secular  dimensions,  I  try  to  anchor 
Myself  with  formula  actions 
Hoping  to  discover  the  right  incantation 
The  proper  gesture,  the  spell  not  found 
In  any  grimoire 

In  the  dawn  I  see  other  colors 

Violet  and  pink,  pearl  silk  and  mystic  gold 

Cool  music,  her  spectral  flesh 

Cathedrals  of  April 

Cities  rising  from  the  hallowed  night 

The  rain  back  to  legend 

Blue  owls  waiting 

In  a  forest  beyond  prayer 

—by  G.  Sutton  Breiding 
in  A  Clerk's  Journal 


HELIUM  REFLECTIONS 

Memories  of  summer  Sunday 

helicopters  rising  from  the  magic  garden 

and  Emma 

in  lingering  skirt 

posing  for  a  photograph 

by  men  of  iron 

harder 

so  much  more  than  she  expected 

— byC.K.  DeRugeris 


AN  ADULT  HAMBURGER  (understands  romance) 

An  adult  hamburger 
built  to  fit  an  adult  mouth 
times  millions, 

with  some  greaseless  home  fries 
for  those  seamless  new  thighs. 

You  utter  your  one  word  of  Italian 
at  the  beverage  counter 

and  invent  your  own  salad 
named  after  yourself. 

An  adult  hamburger 
for  a  mouth  that's  been  around 
times  millions  of  blocks, 

with  your  choice  of  cheese  toupees 
on  an  art  deco  tray. 

An  assertive,  ambitious,  achiever 
of  a  burger,  a  hamburger 
out  to  have  a  good  time. 

—by  Kurt  Lipschutz 


34 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


HE  SAIDTHE  HOMECOMING 


wasn  7  like  any 
fucking  war  flick 
parade  no  confetti 
or  trumpets  tfie 
cabs  on  strike 
after  JFK  upstate 
on  West  Allen 
old  brownstones 
torn  open  for 
concrete  tie  said 
a  girl  witfi  long 
ironed  tiair  spit 
seeing  his  uniform 
medals  in  ttie 
bottom  of  the 
suitcase  he  said 
I  got  near  my 
brother's     called 
said  this  is 
Tom,  he  said  Tom 
who?  Jesus  fucking, 
your  brother.  I  got 
a  room  mate  now 
Ray  says  but  I 
guess  its  ok 
for  you  to 
stop  by 


—by  Lyn  Lifshin 


THE  PALACE  REVOLUTION 

The  mad  queen  broke  the  mirror  with  a  curse, 
set  her  heart  against  a  silent  mountain, 
and  pelted  her  ghosts  with  our  produce. 

In  the  morning  she  was  locked 

in  the  wine  cellar, 

and  the  stern  Administress  of  the  Interior 

promised  a  reign  of  order  and  terror. 

We  are  saved.  We  are  lost. 

Already  the  factions  foment. 

Long  Live  the  Queen!  the  old  men  remember 

fondly  the  incitation  of  wilderness  eyes. 

But  the  crowds  yell:  Infrastructure  Now! 

to  the  diggers  of  canals,  pavers-over, 

and  mechanical  engineers. 

In  the  underground  airport,  business 
travelers  and  refugees  mingle  and  lose 
their  luggage  like  always. 

The  men  are  frightened.  The  women 
are  like  the  men. 
Now  is  the  time  to  buy. 

—by  Barbara  Schaffer 


traitors 

no  room  in  this  mirror  for  both  of  us 

your  armored  thoughts  have  got  to  go 

your  forearms  scarred  with  tattooed  hearts 

your  epaulets  with  bars 

you  can  stay  hard  for  a  longer  time 

(/  can  stay  sad  forever) 

&  glide  through  strangers'  paradise 

with  the  same  familiar  hells 

'  'here. . .  this  is  where  the  bullet  pierced, ' ' 

you  said,  "did  you  know  I  killed  a  man?" 

you  flew  in  the  air  force 

I  marched  on  dry  land 

you  got  a  medal  (I  got  a  suntan) 

&  parched  ribs  on  napalmed  sand 

"waves, "  you  wept 

'  'cold  as  glass  hands 

pulled  this  country  down" 

no  room  in  this  mirror  for  both  of  us 

no  room  to  swim  or  drown 

these  are  the  fingers  that  trigger  your  passion 

&  set  your  flesh  on  fire 

&  these  are  the  fingers  that  push  the  buttons 

that  send  us  all  to  hell 

I  can  see  love  go  up  in  smoke 
you  see  clear  blue  sky 
shrapnel  tides  on  moonlit  nights 
bombard  our  asphalt  pride 
with  one  more  bone  to  fill  the  hole 
&  one  more  back  to  knife 

—by  William  K.  Maximin 


NOW  WE  ARE  SIX  (or  rEAl  liFE  pOeM  #  .01 ) 


andrea  asked  alice 

"what  is  the  Fourth  of  July?" 

alice  said  "Fireworks  day" 

"but  do  you  know  what  it  means?" 

asked  andrea 

'  'No ' ',  said  alice 

"it's  the  birth  of  our  nation" 

' 'How  old  is  it  then ? ' '  asked  alice. 

'  '208  years  old ' ' 

'  'It  should  be  dead  by  now ' ', 

said  alice. 

—by  Julia  Barclay 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


36 


HE  acrid  aroma  of  warm  ketchup 
and  vinegar  revives  me  as  I  step  into 
the  cool  rose  -hued  early  morning 
air.  I  crawl  into  my  tin-plated  subcompact 
and  rev  the  engine  into  a  dull  roar.  I'm 
gliding  onto  the  Nimitz  Freeway,  past  the 
ketchup  factories  and  canneries,  past  the 
"outdated"  industrial  plants,  the  factories 
and  warehouses.  Past  the  abandoned  bus 
factory,  where  rusted  engines  and  bus 
chassis'  lay  strewn  over  the  yard.  Past  the 
truck  plant  employee  parking  lot,  once  a 
dense  concentration  of  pickups  and 
chevy's,  now  a  desolate  landscape  of 
tumbleweeds  and  beercans.  I'm  cruising 
over  the  San  Mateo  bridge  and  veering 
south,  into  the  future.  The  signs  say  Palo 
Alto,  Mountain  View,  Sunnyvale  but  I'm 
reading  Silicon  Valley  on  each  one.  No 
more  smokestacks,  no  more  peaked  tin 
roofs.  Instead  we  have  "university  style 
buildings."  Flat  roofs.  Rolling  lawns.  I  pull 
into  the  parking  lot  of  Hewlett-Packard's 
Santa  Clara  Division,  slowing  down  to  flash 
my  badge  to  the  guard  on  duty  but  not 
really  bothering  to  stop.  Why  waste 
precious  time?  We  receive  a  notice  on  this 
once  a  month.  "All  employees  must  come 
to  a  full  stop  and  show  the  guard  their 
badge."  For  our  own  safety  and  security  of 
course. 

I  walk  across  the  vast  parking  lot  in  the 
slanting  morning  sun  clutching  my  paper 
bag  of  lunch.  I  remember  my  first  days  at. 
HP  being  ridiculed  for  bringing  my  lunch  in 
a  tin  bucket,  like  everyone  did  at  the 
factory.  HA  HA,  where  do  you  come  from? 
It  reminded  people  of  Fred  Flintstone  and 
Barney  Rubble  going  to  work  at  the  stone 
quarry.  Here  we  bring  lunch  in  paper  bags. 
That's  progress.  I  show  my  badge  to  the 
guard  at  the  desk  and  walk  into  the  stale 
conditioned  air  of  building  2A.  My  building 
is  only  one  of  five  at  this  division  employing 


38 


i!=^1 


7S\ 


almost  2000  people.  The  building  is  a  sea  of 
modular  partitions  and  workbenches.  ! 
mumble  my  hello's  to  the  technicians  at 
their  benches  hunched  over  their  data 
books,  catching  up  on  a  little  sleep.  I  wave 
hello  in  the  direction  of  the  women 
assemblers,  already  perched  over  their 
chassis's,  trying  to  remember  what  goes 
where.  I  make  my  way  to  my  bench, 
mechanical  assembler  position,  a  fifteen 
foot  long  bench  with  trays  and  trays  of  nuts, 
bolts,  screws,  washers,  and  hardware 
stretched  out  before  me.  A  pile  of  tools  at 
my  elbows.  I  quickly  take  off  my  jacket  and 
fumble  my  tools  around,  coughing  and 
clearing  my  throat.  To  announce  my 
presence.  There  are  no  time  clocks  to  punch 
here  so  you  are  clocked  in  by  the  several 
busybodies  who  make  it  their  business  to 
see  when  you  come  in.  The  eyes  and  ears  of 
the  supervisors.  If  your  jacket  is  still  on,  it 
means  that  you  just  walked  in  the  door.  I 
make  a  short  trip  to  the  main  coffee 
dispenser  in  the  main  building.  Cot  to  start 
waking  up.  I  stare  at  the  skeleton  of  an 
instrument  before  me  on  my  workbench. 
Where  did  I  leave  off?  It  starts  coming  back 
to  me  and  I  slowly  start  piecing  the  skeleton 
together,  destined  to  become  yet  another 
Hewlett-Packard  Fourier  Analyzer.  Noth- 
ing to  look  forward  to  until  9  o'clock  break. 
The  morning  is  a  blur  of  humming  floure- 
scent  lights  and  luke-warm  coffee.  I  am  lost 
in  my  work  until,  finally,  the  break  trays  are 
spotted  rolling  down  the  aisles.  It's 
Tuesday,  cookie  day.  I  see  the  forewarned 
are  already  heading  the  cart  off  at  the  pass, 
grabbing  the  best  cookies.  The  cart  arrives 
and  two  pots  of  coffee  and  the  tray  of 
cookies  are  placed  on  our  rack  before 
rolling  off  to  distribute  to  other  break  areas. 
A  line  is  quickly  formed  and  we  grab  our 
rations  and  join  our  respective  social  circles 
to  talk  and  gossip.  I  edge  into  an  assembler 
station  and  talk  with  some  friends. 

"Where's    Ellen    today?",     I    ask    the 
group. 

PROCESSED  WORLD #14 


Marie  perks  up,  "You  didn't  see  her  get 
the  escort  yesterday?  She  got  canned 
yesterday  about  2:30." 

"What!!,"  I  shout  in  disbehef  I  lower 
my  voice  instantly  and  everyone  looks  ner- 
vously around.  "Why?" 

"That  bitch  of  a  lead  didn't  like  her. 
Prob'ly  'cause  she's  black.  I  talked  to  her 
last  night.  She's  glad  to  be  out  of  here,  she 
was  sick  of  this  place." 

"She  really  needed  this  job  though," 
says  Becky.  "It's  hard  to  find  work  these 
days." 

Everyone  nods. 

"She'll  find  something,  "  says  Marie. 

The  conspiracy  of  the  five  of  us  talk 
quietly,  making  sure  one  of  the  supervi- 
sors, or  their  eyes  or  ears  aren't  listening 
in  We  all  keep  smiles  on  our  faces.  HP, 
you  see,  doesn't  have  layoffs.  Never. 
There'll  be  no  unemployment  insurance 
for  them  to  pay  Coincidentally,  when  the 
economy  goes  sour,  there  seems  to  be  a 
rash  of  firings.  In  the  afternoon,  there'll  be 
a  tap  on  the  back,  a  quick  trip  to  personnel, 
and  out  the  door  without  one  chance  to  say 
"goodbye,  I'm  fired."  Not  one  chance  to 
tell  your  coworkers  what's  happening  or 
exchange  phone  numbers.  Spiriting  people 
out  the  door  like  that  makes  most  people 
feel  they're  to  blame  themselves.  Most  are 
too  embarassed  to  even  come  back  for  their 
belongings. 

"1  was  just  getting  to  know  Ellen,  too 
bad,"  I  mutter  to  myself. 

And  then,  much  too  soon,  break's  over. 
We  all  saunter  back  to  our  work  stations. 

I'm  up  to  my  elbows  in  hardware.  I'm 
assembling  frames  for  instruments.  As- 
sembling the  chassis,  installing  the  trans- 
former, the  switch  assembly,  the  fuse- 
holders,  the  lights  and  LED's,  the  card- 
holders. I'm  installing  the  mini  box  fan,  to 
keep  the  instrument  cool  and  calm.  Me  and 
these  fans  have  a  history.  I  got  tired  of 
watching  the  heavy  solder  smoke  curl  up 
the  women's  nostrils  over  in  chassis  wiring 
area 

"How  can  you  stand  breathing  that  stuff 
all  day  long?",  I  would  ask. 

"HMM,  oh,  you  get  used  to  it,"  Mae 
said.  She  ought  to  know,  she's  been 
working  for  HP  for  thirty  years  now.  One  of 
the  few  who  still  remember  Bill  and  Dave 
handing  out  the  Christmas  checks. 

"It's  really  bad  to  breathe  that  stuff  you 
know." 

"Oh,  everything  is  bad  for  you  these 
days    " 

Mae  is  the  tough,  loyal  old-timer  type. 
The  other  women  on  the  line  detested 
breathing  fumes  all  day  long  however.  So,  I 
started  requisitioning  extra  box  fans  from 
the  stock  room,  since  my  job  enabled  me  to 
procure  spare  parts  for  repair  work.  ! 
would  wire  the  little  fans  and  put  them  on 


the  workbenches  and  they  would  at  least 
blow  the  solder  smoke  away  from  the  nos- 
trils. Soon,  everyone  wanted  a  little  fan  of 
their  own.  I  was  having  a  hard  time  filling 
orders.  All  was  well  for  several  months 
when,  boom,  our  breath  of  fresh  air  died. 
The  management  caught  on  to  our  poor 
judgement  and  misuse  of  company  assets. 
Fans  were  for  cool  and  breezy  instruments, 
not  for  assemblers  faces.  The  fans  were 
rounded  up  and  herded  back  into  the 
stockroom.  No  one,  it  seemed,  really  knew 
where  those  little  fans  came  from  all  wired 
up  like  that  though.  Mysterious. 

At  one  of  our  little  department 
meetings,  I  requested  ventilation 
for  all  the  employees  benches.         /■ 
Sherry,  our  new  supervisor,  AK 

was  horrified.  Supes  were 
rated  on  keeping 
department 

expenditures  ,      ^r^ 

down.     She  V-'a^ 

smiled   benevolently,         ^-^ 
after   regaining   her 

composure,  and  chided  us  little  children  for 
asking  for  exorbitant  luxuries  like  venti- 
lation. Sherry  was  a  new  hire  fresh  from 
Stanford  who  had  never  worked  a  day  in 
her  life  before  now,  yet  here  she  was 
telling  the  electronic  facts  of  life  to  people 
who  have  been  working  in  the  industry  for 
many  years.  No  one,  however,  backed  me 
up  on  my  proposal  after  she  ridiculed  it  like 
that. 

Around  a  month  later,  Mae  came  back 
from  a  three  week  vacation,  all  tan  and 
relaxed.  Her  second  day  back  on  the  job 
she  came  in  furious. 

"Do  you  know.  Sherry,  that  I've  had 
blisters  in  my  nostrils  for  as  long  as  I  can 
remember.  They  actually  went  away  while 
I  was  on  my  vacation.  I  could  actually 
breathe  properly.  Do  you  know  that  one 
day  back  on  the  job  and  they're  back  again! 
It's  that  damn  solder  smoke,  I'm  sure  of  it. 
We  must  have  some  vents  in  here!" 

Sherry's  face  was  a  flustered  pink  while 
Mae  continued  her  story  to  all  the  women 
in  the  area  as  they  sat  around  the  big  table 
wiring  chassis.  Big  festering  sores  in  her 
nose  for  twenty-some  odd  years  and  never 
placed  the  cause. 

On  break  time  I  wrote  up  a  petition 
demanding  ventilation  and  everyone  quick- 
ly signed.  I  xeroxed  it  and  left  it  on 
Sherry's  desk.  I  told  her  I'm  giving  a  copy 
to  the  area  manager.  She  was  in  a  panic. 
Letting  rebellion  spread  is  an  unpardon- 
able offense  for  a  supervisor.  Several  days 
later,  installation  people  were  installing  a 
central  vent  with  individual  air  scoops  for 
the  work  stations.  Sherry's  hatred  of  me 
stems  from  this  day. 

I'm  installing  a  cable  harness  and  sub- 
assembly which  comes  from   yet   another 


area. 

Now  it's 
ready  for 
the  chassis  wiring, 
put  it  on  a  shelf  for  the 
wiring  people  to  take.  It  will 
take  them  about  eight  hours  to 
wire  just  one  of  them.  I  go  back  to  another 
chassis  and  repeat  the  same  steps.  I  work 
automatically,  grabbing  the  right  crinkle 
washer,  the  right  locknuts,  screws,  tinner- 
mans.  Working  miniature  little  nuts  into 
the  tiny  space  between  the  transformer  and 
the  frame.  What  a  pain.  My  hands  fly  from 
tweezers  to  screwdrivers,  to  needle  nose 
pliers  to  wirecutters,  solder  irons,  solder 
suckers,  crescent  wrenches,  alien  wrench- 
es, bus  wire,  the  tools  of  the  trade.  I'm  like 
an  automaton.  I  know  this  particular  instru- 
ment well  so  I  can  daydream  and  still  work. 
I  listen  to  the  chatter  of  the  technicians 
behind  me.  I  catch  snatches  of  their  con- 
versation: the  49ers,  some  asshole  of  a 
referee,  Willy  Nelson's  concert,  some 
blonde  in  a  ferrari...  I  see  Louie  hunched 
over  his  work  station.  He's  strapping  a  just 
tested  laser  on  the  vibration  board.  Straps 
it  down  with   a   big   black   rubber   strap. 


PROCESSED  WORLD m 


37 


Turns  on  the  motor  and  it  shakes,  rattles 
and  rolls  with  the  sound  of  an  outboard 
motor.  They  build  these  lasers  tough. 
Louie  shuts  the  motor  off  and  prepares 
another  one.  Last  week  Louie  was  walking 
the  line  between  getting  fired  or  electro- 
cuted. The  company  had  been  talking  for 
months  of  the  dangers  of  static  electrical 
damage  to  delicate  CMOS  parts.  J  ust  think 
of  it,  miniature  lightning  bolts  at  our 
fingertips,  this  static  electricity.  They 
corralled  us  all  into  the  conference  room  for 
a  thirty  minute  film  on  the  danger.  We  saw 
crashing  F-111's  all  for  the  sake  of  a  burnt 
out  little  CMOS  chip.  Sounded  like  a  good 
idea  to  me.  A  little  later  we  were  all  handed 
a  big  black  mat  that  was  electrically 
grounded  to  our  workstations  to  protect 
these  chips.  No  more  coffee  cups  at  our 
area  as  styrofoam  is  a  harborer  of  these 
dangerous  electrical  charges.  Certain  fab- 
rics were  not  allowed  to  be  worn  to  work. 
Then  they  handed  us  all  little  bracelets 
with  straps  to  strap  ourselves  to  the  tables. 
To  ground  ourselves  to  not  damage  the 
chips.  Amazingly  enough  most  people  did 
not  want  to  be  leashed  like  dogs  to  their 
work  stations.  To  the  assemblers  it  was  an 


insulting  thought,  but  to  the  technicians  It 
was  like  telling  them  to  stand  in  a  puddle  of 
water  and  stick  their  finger  in  an  electrical 
socket. 

Louie  expressed  his  fears  to  me.  "I 
spend  my  whole  technical  career  trying  to 
remember  the  old  axiom  of  never  ground- 
ing yourself  and  they  ask  me  to  do  it  volun- 
tarily. I  work  with  10,000  volts  on  the 
power  supply  of  this  laser.  One  slip  and  I'm 
cooked  meat  with  this  grounding  strap." 

Louie  is  a  quiet  guy.  He  agonized 
privately  over  this  dilemma  for  several 
days,  disturbed  that  all  his  coworkers  saw 
no  problem  with  the  arrangement.  One 
afternoon  he  exploded  into  a  tirade  against 
the  grounding  strap,  pointing  out  the 
dangers  to  his  coworkers.  Seems  no  one 
had  really  thought  about  it.  They  all 
trusted  the  company's  engineers  to  think  it 
through  and  make  a  good  decision.  They  all 
saw  Louie's  side  and  agreed  unanimously 
to  refuse  to  use  the  strap.  They  scheduled  a 
meeting  the  next  day  with  the  big  boss  who 
also  agreed  it  was  a  stupid  idea.  Seems  the 
office  people  had  been  sold  on  all  this  stuff 
by  the  marketing  group.  Sounded  reason- 
able to  them  as  they  never  work  on  elec- 
tronics. That  was  the  end  of  the  "Leash 
Law  "  Louie  retreated  back  into  his  shy 
little  corner  again. 

I  see  Mike  and  Pam  winding  their  way 
through  the  burn-in  area,  coming  to  get  me 
for  lunch.  We  join  the  stream  of  the  hungry 
in  the  aisle  and  walk  up  the  stairs  and 
through  a  long  sunlit  corridor  to  the 
cafeteria.  We  take  our  trays  outside,  for 
some  fresh  air.  Some  people  are  playing 
volleyball  at  the  net  stretched  across  the 
courtyard  area  outside  the  cafeteria.  The 
famed  silicon  valley  recreation  area.  This 
isn't  a  factory,  it's  a  country  club.  Actually, 
you'd  be  a  fool  to  use  your  thirty  minute 
lunchbreak  to  bat  a  ball  around.  You  eat, 
talk  a  little  and  it's  back  to  work.  The 
people  who  play  volleyball  are  either  on  a 
diet  or  have  no  lunch  money.  I  suppose  the 
engineers  could  play  volleyball  in  between 
designing  new  technology  but  I've  never 
seen  them.  They  go  to  their  private  health 
clubs  that  are  scattered  throughout  silicon 
valley. 

We  gossip  and  bullshit  about  who's  been 
fired,  how  we  managed  to  goof  off  today 
and  who's  been  getting  it  on  with  who.  The 
latter  is  a  very  popular  item  for  discussion 
as  the  plant  is  half  male  and  half  female. 
Fertile  grounds  for  a  thriving  Peyton  Place. 
We  plan  our  upcoming  weekend.  Before 
we  know  it  it's  time  to  troop  back  down  to 
our  workstations.  It  was  nice  seeing  the 
sun  as  there's  no  windows  in  the  building 
downstairs.  No  distractions.  Croups  of  us 
are  drifting  back  to  work,  a  parade  of 
happyfaced  clones.  We  all  wear  painted 
smiles.  All  one  big  family.  Management 


wears  shirts  with  the  sleeves  rolled  up  and 
no  ties.  That's  their  uniform.  Most  have  no 
doors  on  their  offices.  They  have  the  "open 
door  policy"  here.  We  refer  to  that  policy 
when  they  fire  someone  "They  open  the 
door  and  throw  them  out."  When  I  was 
first  hired,  at  a  different  HP  facility,  my 
boss  told  me,  "You  don't  come  here  to 
make  money.  You  come  here  to  make  a 
contribution.  We  don't  discuss  wages  here 
with  each  other,  that's  strictly  personal."  I 
remember  my  final  interview  with  this  guy, 
my  original  boss.  With  his  pen  he  wrote 
these  letters  in  capitals  for  me.  M-E-R-l-T 


38 


"This  is  the  key  to  your  success  here,"  he 
told  me.  "Merit  — not  seniority  like  union 
jobs  or  cost  of  living  or  stuff  like  that. 
That's  the  old  days."  I  noticed  he  had  a 
pack  of  Merit  cigarettes  sticking  out  of  his 
breast  pocket.  What  a  loser  this  guy  is  I 
thought  as  I  shook  his  hand  happily  and 
agreed  on  my  future  career  with  HP.  I  had 
lied  about  my  work  history.  I  knew  I 
couldn't  tell  him  that  my  last  job,  before  I 
was  laid  off,  was  a  lumper  with  the  Teams- 
ters Union  making  twice  the  wage  I  was  to 
start  out  as  at  HP.  Anyone  with  union 
background  is  tainted  at  HP. 

I  was  sent  to  a  big  introduction  to  the 
company,  to  "see  the  garage"  as  they  say. 
It  was  a  four  hour  media  extravaganza  with 
a  talk  by  some  VIP,  a  slideshow,  and  a  big 
presentation  by  personnel  on  "The  HP 
Way."  The  garage  was  the  highlight  of  the 
slide  show,  the  garage  being  the  place 
where  Bill  Hewlett  and  Dave  Packard  built 
their  first  instrument,  an  oscillator  for  the 
Walt  Disney  production  of  "Fantasia."  1 
was  fully  indoctrinated  by  the  end  of  these 
four  hours  and  found  myself  becoming  an 
android  for  Bill  and  Dave.  I  kept  trying  not 
to  think  about  the  time  when  Dave  Packard 
was  Undersecretary  of  Defense  for  Nixon 
at  the  time  of  the  Vietnam  War  and  a  group 
of  us  lit  fire  to  the  hotel  he  was  speaking  at. 
The  flames  were  licking  around  the  hotel 
and  we  could  actually  see  Packard  and  his 
buddies  at  the  top  of  the  hotel.  We  all 
chanted  "Pig  Nixon,  you're  never  gonna 
kill  us  all"  as  we  blocked  the  arrival  of  the 
firetrucks.    It  took  several   squads  of   riot 

PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


cops  to  break  us  loose  and  send  us 
scattering  into  the  balmy  Palo  Alto  night. 
That  was  a  long  time  ago  however. 

My  first  place  of  employment  at  HP  was 
phased  out  of  existence  as  they  moved  to 
their  Santa  Rosa  facility  where  the  wages 
were  cheaper.  They  started  moving  regular 
employees  to  other  worksites  and  bringing 
temporaries  in  to  take  their  places  until 
production  was  halted  for  good.  Almost 
every  temporary  was  black.  That  was 
weird.  There  were  1  or  2  black  employees 
out  of  several  hundred  people  in  my  area. 
HP  claims  its  racial  percentage  is  better 
than  average.  HP  is  a  very  large  employer 
for  the  area  and  obviously  hires  very  few 
blacks.  This  leaves  a  lopsided  percentage 
to  look  for  work  as  temporaries.  My  boss 
explained  it  to  me  at  one  "Beer  Bust." 
This  is  where  they  roll  out  a  few  kegs  of 
beer  and  some  hot  dogs  to  express  their 
appreciation  of  us. 

'Blacks  aren't  good  workers,"  my 
boss  explained  to  me,  quickly  looking 
around  making  sure  no  one  was  in  earshot. 
He  was  quite  delighted  at  sharing  his  little 
philosophy  with  me,  an  obviously  sympa- 
thetic white  man.  "They're  just  trouble 
makers,  we  prefer  the  orientals."  The 
plant  was  full  of  Filipinos,  Vietnamese,  and 
Mexican  and  Latin  Americans.  Not  Chi- 
canos  but  green  card  workers.  HP  ensures 
its  workforce  will  be  people  not  in  a  good 
position  to  make  "selfish"  demands  on  the 
company. 

I  arrive  back  at  my  bench.  It's  time  for 
"button  up."  I  receive  a  finished  instru- 
ment from  the  technician  after  it's  been 
assembled,  wired,  and  burned  in.  (Ran  in  a 
hot  box  for  several  days.)  It's  now  ready  to 
get  the  final  covers  on  it.  I  bring  it  over  to 
the  button  up  area.  I  fill  in  the  forms  for 
shipping/receiving  and  check  the  instru- 
ment for  damage  or  paint  chips.  I  clean  the 
unit  up.  Put  it  on  a  cart  and  I'm  off 
wheeling  this  new  machine  to  the  stock 
room.  None  of  us  assemblers  really  know 
what  these  things  do.  We  only  know  it  goes 
with  a  bunch  of  other  instruments,  a 
computer,  a  CRT  screen  and  a  keyboard 
and  costs  around  200,000  dollars.  Occa- 
sionally we  see  who  buys  them.  General 
Motors,  Lockheed,  the  Swedish  Air  Force. 
They  are  Fourier  Analyzers.  That's  not  the 
only  thing  we  make  here  though.  Within 
these  five  buildings  we  produce  hundreds 
of  different  instruments.  From  lasers  to 
custom  integrated  circuits.  I  wheel  my  cart 
around  into  the  stockroom  and  dump  it  on 
another  table.  Will  comes  and  checks  it  off 
on  his  list.  Will  is  a  different  breed  of 
employee.  Most  of  the  workers  here  are 
young.  Will  is  in  his  fifties,  from  the  old 
school  of  electronics  of  electron  tubes  and 
military  jargon.  He's  head  of  the  HP 
garden  club.  There  is  a  several  acre  lot 


outside  the  building  that  has  been  plowed 
up  and  fenced  in.  It  was  divided  into  about 
50  parcels  of  land.  We  could  sign  up  for 
one  of  them  and  grow  crops  on  it.  I  signed 
up  as  I  love  gardening  and  could  use  some 
free  vegetables.  Several  days  a  week  I 
would  join  scores  of  others  filing  out  to  the 
garden  to  hoe,  plant,  and  water  in  the 
slanting  afternoon  sun,  the  HP  monolith 
hovering  in  the  background.  The  scene 
brought  to  mind  a  post-1984  nightmare, 
serfdom  of  the  future.  Working  in  the  plant 
all  day  and  growing  your  crops  outside.  It 
just  lacked  the  barracks  to  sleep  in.  Our 
crops  were  coming  along  OK.  At  least  I 
thought  so.  From  the  front  of  the  garden, 
with  the  factory  in  the  background  my 
cucumbers  and  tomatoes  were  doing  fine. 
Most  of  my  plot  went  to  corn  though.  I 
noticed  that  as  I  walked  into  the  corn  patch 
the  closest  rows  were  lush  and  green,  but 


as  I  walked  closer  to  the  factory,  the  plants 
were  sickly  and  yellow  and  the  last  third  of 
them  had  not  even  come  up  at  ail.  I  thought 
at  first  that  I  was  just  lazy  and  not  watering 
the  rear  as  much  as  the  front,  but  one  day  I 
took  a  sweeping  look  of  the  whole  HP 
garden  club  and  noticed  that  a  giant  line  of 
sickly  yellow  had  been  drawn  down  the 
width  of  the  garden  plot.  One  third  of  the 
garden  was  poisoned!  Then  I  realized  that 
the  whole  plot  of  land  that  stretched  from 
the  garden  plot  to  the  building  had  not  one 
blade  of  grass  or  weed  on  it.  We  were 
gardening  on  the  edge  of  some  sea  of 
poisonous  chemicals!  I  was  thankful  that  I 
hadn't  carried  home  a  load  of  chemical 
soaked  vegetables  to  my  wife  who  was 
pregnant  at  the  time.  I  pointed  this 
chemical  sweep  out  to  the  garden  club 
officials,  but  they  thought  it  would  still  be 
OK  to  eat  the  vegetables  that  survived  the 
chemical  holocaust.  That  was  the  end  of  my 
green  thumb.  I  let  my  poor  garden  shrivel 
in  the  sun. 


PROCESSED  WORLD  «14 


38 


TOE 


YUPPIE 


^ 


I'm  back  at  my  bench  again,  assembling, 
assembling,  assembling.  I've  run  out  of 
excuses  to  leave  my  bench.  I've  gotten 
parts  out  of  the  stockroom,  I've  delivered 
to  the  stockroom,  I've  gone  to  the  bath- 
room, I  went  to  get  some  more  shipping 
forms.  I've  accepted  the  fact  of  working  till 
the  afternoon  break.  It's  amazing  what  you 
will  get  used  to.  You  do  develop  some  pride 
in  your  ability  to  do  simple  things.  I  can 
assemble  these  things  very  fast  when  I 
want  to  which  is  not  very  often.  Me  and  one 
other  woman  are  the  only  ones  who  know 
how  to  assemble  these  things.  She  trained 
me  as  she  will  retire  in  several  years.  Bess 
has  been  doing  this  job  for  almost  thirty 
years,  another  old-timer.  I  was  asked  to 
document  the  assembly  of  this  product  as  I 
learned  the  procedure,  but  I  stopped  after 
a  few  weeks.  We're  more  valuable  this 
way. 

Second  break.  More  coffee  comes  rolling 
down  the  aisle.  I  grab  a  cup  and  I'm  off  at  a 


fast  pace  to  visit  some  friends  in  another 
building.  It's  about  a  3  minute  walk  to  get 
there  and  I  only  have  ten  minutes.  I  run 
past  the  stock  area,  past  the  machine  shop, 
past  the  degreasing  area  with  its  vats  of 
steaming  chemicals.  I  walk  into  the  vast 
Printed  Circuit  Board  area.  There's  about 
50  women  sitting  in  front  of  little  racks  of 
Printed  Circuit  boards,  loading  them  up 
with  capacitors.  Integrated  Circuits,  and 
resistors.  Pairs  of  reddening  eyes  look  up 
from  their  giant  illuminated  magnifying 
glasses  and  microscopes.  I  see  my  friends, 
Laura  and  Rose  standing  up  and  stretching 
in  the  walkway.  Laura  had  worked  with  me 
at  my  last  jobsite  for  HP  and  transferred 
here  also.  We  go  out  the  back  door  and 
cross  the  parking  lot  to  smoke  a  joint  in 
Rose's  car.  Both  complain  of  their  super- 
visors. The  printed  circuit  area  is  a  very 
harrassed  area.  Lots  of  bickering  and 
quarreling.  The  stories  they  tell  remind  me 
of  the  movie  "Caged"  where  the  matronly 


women  jailers  harrass  and  torment  their 
prisoners,  mostly  young  women.  We  finish 
the  joint  and  run  back  to  the  building.  I  still 
must  reach  my  area  in  a  matter  of  minutes. 
Being  a  few  minutes  late  from  break  time 
can  be  an  excuse  for  a  lousy  or  no  pay  raise 
come  review  time. 

It  won't  be  long  now.  The  final  stretch  of 
the  afternoon  has  begun.  My  eyes  are 
fatigued.  My  fingers  are  trembling  from 
dexteriously  manipulating  hardware  all 
day.  I'm  bored  to  death.  I've  run  out  of 
reminiscences,  sexual  fantasies,  and  day- 
dreams. I  think  of  what  I'm  going  to  do 
tonight.  The  early  risers  are  starting  to 
drift  out.  Our  "flextime"  enables  us  to 
come  to  work  within  a  two  hour  time  slot, 
work  our  hours  and  leave.  Sometimes  I 
appreciate  this  flexibility,  but  I  really  miss 
the  power  I  felt  working  in  the  factory  when 
we  all  arrived  en  masse  to  take  control  of 
the  machines.  Even  as  wage  slaves,  there 
is  something  very  powerful  when  a  shift  of 
workers  leaves  the  production  lines  at  the 
same  time  and  march  out  of  the  plant 
together.  Something  that  reinforced  and 
gave  the  impression  of  unity  and  solidarity. 
Here,  in  silicon  valley,  they  have  us  believe 
that  we  voluntarily  come  to  work  on  our 
own  accord  and  at  our  own  convenience. 
What  a  joke. 

Finally  I  have  five  minutes  to  go.  I  start 
cleaning  up  my  area.  Put  away  the  tools.  I 
nod  goodbye  to  my  co-workers.  "See  ya 
tomorrow,  take  it  easy."  I'm  out  the  door. 
Fresh  air,  how  great.  Cars  are  revving  up 
and  twisting  out  of  the  parking  lot.  I  check 
the  paint  on  my  car.  A  few  rust  spots, 
that's  all.  A  few  weeks  ago  it  was 
discovered  that  the  ventilation  system  was 
fouled  up  and  raw  chemical  fumes  were 
being  emitted  from  the  "smoke  stacks."  It 
had  stripped  the  paint  off  of  300  cars  and 
HP  paid  for  new  paint  jobs  for  all  of  them. 
At  first  I  thought  how  generous,  but  what 
other  damage  had  been  done?  What  did  it 
do  to  our  lungs  or  the  lungs  of  nearby 
housing  tract  neighbors?  New  paint  jobs 
were,  I  guess,  a  small  price  to  pay.  I  was 
surprised  that  not  one  thing  about  it 
appeared  in  the  newspapers.  Electronics  is 
such  a  "clean"  industry.  But  then  many 
stories  I've  heard  about  chemical  dumping 
and  poisonous  fumes  never  appear  in  the 
papers. 

I  cruise  out  of  the  parking  lot  and  join  the 
crawling  freeway  traffic  back  to  the  East 
Bay.  Hi  tech  workers  creeping  alongside 
auto  workers  and  warehouse  workers.  The 
only  real  difference  between  us  high-tech 
workers  and  industrial  workers  is  that  we 
get  paid  half  the  amount.  But  then,  that's 
the  HP  way. 

—  by  jay  Clemens 


40 


PROCESSED  WORLD  «14 


International 
Loafers  &  Winos 

Union 


P  at  Skx  I'M  LATE  roommate's  got  the  shower 
DAMN  It's  COLD  this  is  summer?  Going  to 
union  hiring  hall  at  least  avoiding  personnel 
sniffing  my  stinky  armpits  while  I  await  student  finan- 
cial aid  GOTTA  piss  bad  fumble  with  shirt  pants 
stumble  down  silent  drowsy  hallway  OH  NO  if  union 
officers  notice  my  two  year  absence  from  hall  in  school 
paying  cheapie  unemployed  dues  they'll  UGH  my 
roommate's  strange  goofy  morose  part  time  boyfriend 
sits  at  kitchen  table  made  the  coffee  thanks  and  lights 
up  a  joint  he  asks:  Toke?  Why  not?  Weed  and  coffee  I'll 
be  flying  I'M  SCARED  a  union  officer  scrunching  up 
his  face  — "Haven't  seen  you  around  here  past  year 
buddy  let's  see  your  records"  — good  to  piss  finally 
wash  face  take  a  few  more  tokes  gulp  down  coffee 
GUILTY  shouts  Local  6  President  "of  stealing 
privileges  of  union  membership  while  attending  school 
fulltime  without  regard  for  unemployed  union  bro- 
thers" OOOHH  back  to  my  room  undercover  snuggle 
with  drowsy  lover  long  hug  make  up  after  awful 
weekend  fight  soft  heavenly  flight  warmth  touch  flesh 
MUST 

OUT  the  door  SCARED  in  my  pocket  "NICARAGUA 
INVASION"  Claustrophobia  of  urban  scraping  by 
thousands  huddling  here  on  Shotwell  Street  Barrio 
Folsom  21st  Street  playground  drugs  basketball  turf 
Folsom  Boys  Rule  Y  Que  Fire  Department  Pacific  Gas 


&  Electric  the  closeness  of  war  Ironworkers  Hall  fellow 
in  car  with  Ironworkers  patch  on  cap  talking  with  wife  at 
wheel  "Don't  start  talking  like..." 

No  vacation  summer  here 

No  Esprit  De  Corps  t-shirts  or  Mediterranean  sunlight 

Gray  thick  blanket  gray  fog 

its  hues  reflected  onto  streets  buildings  people 

This  is  San  Francisco  too 

Daily  grind  of  lumbering  into  work  daily 

I'm  shivering  need  heavier  jacket  is  it  the  dope 
SCARED  eyes  scrutinizing  ears  listening  haven't 
seen  you  around  hall  deserter  from  the  ranks  of  the 
proletariat  RUSHING  traffic  down  18th  Street  but  Shot- 
well  Street  sleeps  jacked  up  cars  snoozing  on  sidewalk  a 
box  of  tools  left  out  unstolen  watched  by  neighbors  at 
6:45?  Passing  Mission  Health  Center  mural's  fertile 
man/woman/child  happily  gazing  cross  street  at  Kil- 
patrick's  Bakery  whose  pipes  jut  out:  "VEG  OIL" 
"SUGAR"  — within  graying  47  year  olds  coated  with 
white  wonder  twinkle  flour  sugar  and  one  31  year  old 
boyfriend  of  waitress  at  Rite  Spot  Cafe  half  block  down 
her  parents  are  intellectuals  and  she  likes  Sunday 
gospel  services  in  Oakland  RIGHT  turn  on  14th  Street 
left  on  Folsom  under  freeway  rushing  walls  scrawled 
"L'il  Smiley"  "Poor  whites  are  the  niggers  of  the 
revolution"  past  The  Stud  where  only  two  nights  ago  I 
was  drinking  dancing  walking  weezy  home  past  the 
TOOLMASTER  store  where  it  was  spray  painted  "Oh 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


41 


Toolmaster... Master  Me"  and  "Master- 
bation  causes  tool  damage"  Still 
SCARED  will  I  know  anyone?  Did  they 
see  me  at  The  Stud?  left  on  11th  Street 
left  on  Harrison  past  old  beer  brewery 
walls  knocked  out  years  ago  empty 
uprooted  vats  sprawling  fence  torn 
WHERE  ARE  the  winos  street  people 
junkies  urban  beasts  and  goblins  and 
drunken  thrill  seeking  teenagers  staking 
out  territory  at  night  WHY  is  my  heart 
racing? 

Here  hall  is  spray  painted  "International 
Loafers  and  Winos  Union"  Seven  men 
slouching  outside  eye  me  curiously  I  nod 
PUSH  frosted  fog  plexiglass  door  mak- 
ing gray  sun  grayer  smoke  flourescent- 
filled  room  BARS  at  Dispatch  Window 
union  newsletter  dispatch  rules  and  new 
stringent  rules  for  people  avoiding 
DUES  in  line  at  dispatcher's  window  my 
god  it's  Hefferson  at  window  old  time 
400  lb.  stand-up  comedian  alcoholic  town 
fool  who  somebody  says  has  cleaned  up 
still  gets  soused  occasionally  and  one  of 
his  kids  takes  him  home  and  I  always 
thought  he  lived  in  welfare  hotels  and 
when  I  make  it  to  the  window  Hefferson 
says  "10130?  Yer  number  ain't  been  on 
the  job  board  for  awhile— have  to  wait 
till  after  jobs  go  out  to  activate  yer 
number"  Okay  just  wanted  to  check  on 
my  number  man  STUPID  so  I  came  here 
for  nothing  wait  105  minutes  for  nothing 
oh  well  here  I  am 

Nobody  I  know  but  the  little  red  faced 
guy  who  never  talked  once  in  my  5  years 
at  JOLLY  FOODS  which  is  topic  of  con- 
versation of  three  other  guys  so  I  ask: 
they  hiring  still,  what's  it  like?  "You 
worked  there?"  FEAR  cannot  reveal  my 
illegal  student  status  I  say  Yeah  worked 
there  5  years  but  just  got  sick  of  it  quit  a 
couple  of  years  ago  — the  three  guys  turn 
to  me 

Awestruck 

You  gave  up  a  permanent  position  at 

Jolly  Foods? 

SAD 

Very  very  sad 

Their  eyes  are  wide  with  pity  and  wonder 

at  strange  creature  leaping   to  certain 

death  a  lemming  wildly  hopping  out  to 

sea 

My  excuse:  young  single  restless  male 
OUTSIDE  breathe  cool  gray  air  cooly 
startled  turn  to  find  Angel  my  favorite 
Mexican  Jolly  Foods  new  Christian  shop 
steward  "How  are  you  my  friend?" 
sweet  voice  like  fog  floating  over  a  hill- 
side of  three  year  absence  FIRED  Angel 
while  visiting  an  ailing  relative  in  Mexico 


and  THREATENED  to  terminate  me 
year  before  that  when  my  Dad  dared  to 
stay  alive  on  his  deathbed  longer  than 
three  weeks  JOLLY  still  making  Angel 
pay  for  his  sins  he  describes  his  eleven 
jobs  since  then  he  recalls  the  cursed 
name  of  JOLLY  personnel  executioner 
PINKERTON:  no  shit  when  he  used  to 
work  at  Schlage  Lock  people  threw  tools 
at  him  when  he  walked  through  the  shop 
just  like  they  did  to  his  strikebreaking 
ancestors  and  when  Angel  saw  him  last 
week  face  full  of  warts  scabs  monster 
before  our  very  eyes  COLD 

Inside  sitting  near  dumpy  old  guy  with 
bulging  eyes  wool  cap  Local  6-style 
Rodney  Dangerfie'd  close  enough  to  be 


friendly  not  too  close  to  be  presumptu- 
ous reading  of  severed  heads  hearts 
homes  wariscoming  wariscoming  ameri- 
can  prez  sez  war  soon  if  contadora  guys 
don't  negotiate  something  RAGE  sink- 
ing into  daily  routine  job  school 

Am  I  dying? 

But  walking  to  the  hall  I  was 

alive  scared 

alive  worried 

alive  shivering 

but  money  — but  trapped  — but  moving  — 

but  happy  away  from  muggysummers 

Rodney  is  talking  cut  in  unemployment 
benefits  'cause  recession  is  over  it's  only 
melancholy  8.9%  hear  "So  recession  is 


over  ha  ha"  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA 
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA 
I  told  'em  they  should  join  the  Army 
good  benefits  work  on  computers  it's 
wave  of  the  future  Rodney  and  friend 
spoke  earnestly  "I'm  too  old  for  the 
military"  "I  already  did  my  time"  so  we 
get  to  talking  they're  both  from  Wall- 
worth's  closed  down  "this  is  ['eagan 
country"  whole  warehouse  a  year  ago 
"consolidation  of  operations  another  big 
warehouse  shut  tight  another  St. Regis 
ColgateCarnation 

These  47  year  old  guys 
bunch  of  fish  flip-flopping  wildly  on 
beach  their  scales  do  not  shimmer  in  the 
sun  the  grungy  greengraybrown  walls/ 
light  (Angel  is  waiting  for  the  flying  fish 
of  the  future) 

They  ask  where  I  worked  my  true 
confessions  I  quit  Jolly  Foods  to  go  to 
school  nine  months  unemployment  bene- 
fits—NO— I  did  not  tell  them  of  bolshe- 
vik burnout,  Rhonda,  Miguel,  bisexu- 
ality.  The  Stud,  about  how  good  it  felt 
being  fucked  till  he  started  pushing  too 
hard  — so  I  say  night  work  was  steady 
when  I  was  at  Jolly  Rodney  says  Jolly 
doesn't  hire  for  night  production  any- 
more 

Hefferson  takes  the  dispatch  mike:  "No 
jobs  yet  Coffee  truck  is  here  if  you  want 
something"  Guy  standing  in  front 
bellows:  "Fuck  you  and  the  coffee 
truck!"  As  people  saunter  out  I'm  still 
giggling  to  myself  why  I  don't  know 
getting  drowsy  will  go  home  to  sleep 
soon  Hefferson  closes  job  board  five 
minutes  early  so  I  can  finally  put  my 
number  up  on  job  board  behind  40  others 
maybe  I  should  take  that  temp  painting 
job  STOP  LOOK  LISTEN:  there  are  only 
three  or  four  guys  under  30  in  this  hall 

Sitting  down  again  near  Rodney  listen- 
ing to  his  genial  conversation  with  black 
guy  his  age  they  worked  at  Wallworth's 
Rodney  wants  to  leave  at  five  past  9 
turns  to  his  friend 

"Hey  man  gimme  a  dollar's  worth  of 
change" 

"Shee-it,    what    choo    want    a    dollar's 
worth  of  change  for?" 
"For  my  daughter,"  Rodney  says. 
"Sheee-it,  a  dollar's  worth  o'  change  for 
his  daughter— shhee-it" 
Rodney  trudges  out  back  to  his  house  in 
Visitacion  Valley  paid  off  but  taxes  are  a 
bitch  and  it's  too  small  to  rent  you  know 
There  was  an  old  man 
who  swallowed  a  house 
he  died,  of  course. 

by  Jeff  Goldthorpe 


42 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


ill 


S$:v>:::^-:-:-:-:':-:-:':vi?":-:-x'x^^     ^^ 


%   ^   % 


•:-:-::w;:::::>-.v.-.-;^.h» 


IKE  unwanted  guests,  computer  hazards  do  not 
announce  themselves.  They  inspire  sharp 
denials  of  responsibility,  but  are  awkwardly 
tolerated.  No  one  seems  to  know  from  whence  they 
came,  and  the  most  obvious  ways  of  confronting  them 
are  often  overlooked. 

More  than  20  million  workers  spend  more  than  25 
billion  hours  per  year  working  with  computers.  Offices 
install  them  at  a  rate  approaching  3,000  per  day.  As 
computers  change  the  way  workers  work  and  managers 
manage,  business  and  government  develop  a  profound 
dependency  on  them.  As  a  result,  disinterested 
answers  to  computer  safety  questions  are  hard  to  come 
by. 

Corporations  and  government  agencies  have  ig- 
nored, covered  up,  obscured,  or  refused  to  conduct 
research  into  computer  hazards.  But  the  disturbing 
evidence  continues  to  accumulate  and  is  now  difficult, 
even  for  the  computer  faithful,  to  ignore. 

That  evidence  includes  research  corroborating  eleven 
clusters  of  miscarriages,  birth  defects,  and  problem 
pregnancies  among  women  working  with  or  near 
computers  in  North  America  (see  PW  #10  "The  Ugly 
Truth  About  VDTs").  Concern  has  prompted  the 
introduction  of  protective  legislation  in  over  half  the 
states  in  the  U.S.  this  year,  as  well  as  preparations  for 
extensive  NIOSH  (National  Institute  of  Occupational 
Safety  and  Health)  and  other  studies  of  computer 
hazards.  In  response,  computer  boosters  are  launching 
campaigns  to  oppose  and  dilute  proposed  regulations— 

PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


and  to  douse  the  discouraging  words  about  computers. 
These  campaigns  appear  to  be  paying  off. 

The  most  disturbing  biological  changes  experiment- 
ally associated  with  computers  come  from  radiation  and 
electromagnetic  fields.  These,  unlike  the  coal  soot, 
cotton  dust,  and  asbestos  hazards  found  in  mines, 
mills,  and  construction  sites,  elude  the  senses.  They 
may  be  linked  to  chronic  disorders  that  take  years  to 
develop. 

It's  likely  that  a  combination  of  elements  conspire 
against  computer  workers'  health.  The  elements 
include  air  quality,  lighting,  and  the  way  management 
deploys  computers,  as  well  as  radiation  emissions.  This 
complicates  research.  For  example,  a  laboratory  study 
of  computer  radiation  that  fails  to  reproduce  office  air 
and  lighting  conditions  may  not  confirm  a  suspected 
computer  hazard.  Research  insensitive  to  these 
conditions  can  produce  equivocal  results,  which 
computer  corporations  applaud  as  evidence  for  ignoring 
the  hazards. 

A  1979  NIOSH  study  ("An  Investigation  of  Health 
Complaints  and  Job  Stress  in  Video  Display  Opera- 
tors,") suggested  links  between  computer  hazards 
symptoms,  management's  use  of  computers,  and  work- 
place division  of  labor.  The  study  included  data-entry 
clerks  at  San  Francisco's  Blue  Shield  Insurance 
worksite  as  well  as  reporters  and  editors  at  San 
Francisco  newspapers.  The  study  linked  significant 
eye,  back,  and  neck  strain,  headaches,  fatigue,  and 
tension  to  computer  workers  relative  to  a  non-computer 


•:•:•:•  .^•■-   •■^■"'^^^•H^■T^^*:o:?f^^%•:•x•:•:•;•. .      i^  :-:-'-'vS:-''''"-'''"'' 


using  control  group.  But  it  also  found 
that  the  more  control  workers  had  over 
computers  and  job  tasks,  the  less  stress 
they  experienced. 

After  completion  of  the  study,  NIOSH 
psychologist  Dr.  Michael  Smith  com- 
mented on  the  hellish  pace  of  computer- 
ized work  for  the  data-entry  clerks: 
"These  jobs  are  repetitious  and  every 
little  keystroke  that  an  individual  makes 
is  recorded  by  the  computer  and  a  super- 
visor has  only  fo  look  into  a  video  tube  to 
be  able  to  key  in  on  particular  individuals 
and  their  performance.  Partly  as  a  result 
of  this,  VDT  operators  have  the  highest 
stress  jobs  that  we've  ever  seen  — and 
we've  been  in  the  stress  business  for  ten 
years."  On  the  other  hand,  the  news 
reporters  and  editors  NIOSH  studied  had 
fewer  complaints  about  their  computers, 
a  fact  that  researchers  linked  to  greater 
"flexibility,  control  over  job  tasks,  and 
utilization  of  their  education."  (from 
0/f/ce  Hazards,  by  Joel  Makower,  Tilden 
Press,  Washington,  D.C.,  1981,  p.  133) 
In  January,  1985,  Suzanne  Haynes, 
chief  of  medical  statistics  for  the 
National  Center  of  Health  Statistics, 
presented   findings  of   a   study  of   500 


workers  at  (AT&T  Communications') 
Southern  Bell  telephone  company  in 
North  Carolina.  Research  included  278 
computer  users  and  a  control  group  of 
218  non-computer  users.  The  study 
confirmed  the  1979-80  NIOSH  findings 
linking  computer  use  to  a  variety  of 
mild-to-debilitating  aches  and  pains. 

Haynes'  research  also  found  that  after 
more  than  4  hours  in  front  of  a  computer 
terminal,  nearly  1  in  5  workers  reported 
angina  symptoms  — about  ten  times  the 
normal  rate.  (Angina  is  chest  pain  that 
occurs  when  coronary  arteries  constrict 
resulting  in  a  lack  of  oxygen  to  the 
heart.) 

These  findings  may  point  to  profound, 
computer-induced  pathology;  more  pro- 
bably, they  reflect  the  wear  and  tear  of 
unbridled  productivity  which  computers 
make  possible  in  many  workplaces. 

Like  the  Blue  Shield  workers,  tele- 
phone workers,  such  as  those  in  Haynes' 
study,  inhabit  workplaces  thrown  into 
high  gear  by  computers  equipped  with 
Orweilian  software.  Computers  measure 
operators'  performance  and  speed 
against  ever-increasing  work  quotas, 
monitor  restroom  trips,   lunch   periods. 


and  announce  staggered  workbreaks 
that  diminish  the  possibilities  of  informal 
contact  with  fellow  workers. 

Haynes  tacitly  indicted  Southern 
Bell's  deployment  of  computers,  attri- 
buting the  telephone  workers'  angina 
symptoms  to  computerized  productivity 
demands,  and  long  hours  without  ade- 
quate breaks  in  close  quarters  and  with 
little  human  contact. 

Here's  a  breakdown  of  what's  known 
about  computer  hazards  in  light  of 
additional  research. 

Glare 

Computer  workers  can  and  do  react  to 
glare  from  display  screens,  but  glare 
symptoms  are  neither  acute  nor  physio- 
logically exotic,  and  thus  easily  confused 
with  chronic  cold-  and  flu-like  symp- 
toms. 

Glare  from  computer  screens  can 
cause  (or  worsen)  eyestrain  and  body- 
aches  (symptoms  also  occuring  in  glare- 
free  computer  environments).  Clare 
induces  squinting  and  awkward  posture 
to  avoid  blind  spots  and  image-obscuring 
reflections  on  computer  screens.  Bright- 


KEEP 
JANE'S 
FINGERS 
DANCING! 


Secretary  Jane's  keystroke  count  can  slump  anytime:  during  the  first  hour  of  work  before 
sleep's  cobwebs  have  cleared,  at  11:45  when  thoughts  of  lunch  intervene,  or  after  3:00  in  that 
mid-afternoon  doldrum. 

Whenever  it  happens,  PRESS®  (Performance  Reinforcement  Electronics  and  Software  System) 
is  ready  to  help.  If  Jane's  count  drops  below  your  chosen  margin  for  more  than  three  minutes,  a 
subliminal  warning  flickers  at  the  top  of  the  screen.  And  if  Jane  still  hasn't  pulled  herself  together 
after  two  more  minutes,  a  healthy  1-second  jolt  of  50  volts  pulses  out  of  her  specially  modified 
keyboard  and  grounds  harmlessly  through  her  chair.  It's  guaranteed  to  get  her  moving  again!  And  if 
Jane  "steps  away  from  her  desk"  for  more  than  three  minutes  without  prior  supervisor  approval, 
PRESS®   will  dole  out  a  similar  jolt  as  a  little  corrective  reminder  when  she  sits  down  to  work  agam. 

PRESS®  -The  Automated  Zap  that  gives  your  workers  ZIP! 

From  COMTEK  —  The  Productivity  People 


44 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


ness  and  contrast  controls  and  non-glare 
screens  can  reduce  glare  but  often  create 
a  new  eyesore:  inadequate  character 
resolution. 

Bad  lighting  on  glass  screens  causes 
glare.  Office  lighting  designed  for  filing, 
typing,  copying,  mailing,  etc.,  as  well  as 
reflective  office  wall  and  desk  surface, 
are  ill-suited  for  computer  work.  Also, 
electronic  interference  from  other  com- 
puters, flickering  lights,  a  heart  pace- 
maker, and  even  digital  watches,  car- 
peting and  polyester  clothing  (a  reservoir 
of  static  electricity)  can  strain  eyes  by 
reducing  image  clarity  on  the  screen. 

Screen  glare  is  related  to  a  broader 
visual  problem.  "Humans  are  equipped 
with  hunter  soldier  eyes,  made  for 
distance  vision.  Using  eyes  for  close 
work  already  requires  adjustments; 
VDTs  (Video  Display  Terminals)  compli- 
cate the  task,"  according  to  Silicon 
Valley  optometrist  Dennis  Olson.  "Over 
a  long  time  the  problems  that  at  first 
cause  headaches  and  blurred  vision  only 
for  a  half  hour  after  work  can  become 
permanent,"  adds  Dr.  Charles  Margach, 
a  Southern  California  College  optometry 
professor.  Computer  workers,  especially 
those  already  wearing  lenses,  may 
require  special,  corrective  "computer" 
lenses. 

You  can  test  the  glare  from  your 
screen  by  moving  a  hand  mirror  along 
the  screen  with  the  reflective  face  out; 
reflected  light  — from  walls,  furniture, 
picture  frames,  ceilings,  or  light  sources 
—  is  a  potential  source  of  glare. 

Electromagnetic  Field 

On  most  display  units  in  use  today, 
computer  images  are  constructed  by  a 
TV-like  device  that  fires  electron  beams 
from  behind  the  glass  screen.  The 
electron  beams  — also  known  as  cathode 
rays  — selectively  excite  tiny  green,  am- 
ber, or  multi-colored  phosphors  to  form 
characters  and  images.  The  device  is 
called  a  flyback  transformer— "flyback" 
describes  the  rapid,  methodical  sweep  of 
the  electron  beams;  "transformer"  des- 
cribes the  conversion  of  data  in  computer 
memory  into  recognizable  images  on  the 
screen.  The  rare-earth  elements  called 
phosphors  lie  directly  underneath  the 
glass  screen.  Phosphors  glow  only 
temporarily  upon  absorbing  the  electron 
beam.  They  must  be  re-stimulated  or 
"refreshed"  up  to  30  to  60  times  a 
second  in  order  to  form  an  image  that 
appears  stable  to  human  eyes. 

The  phosphors  absorb  the  flyback 
transformer  beams  imperfectly.  As  a 
result,  an  overflow  of  static  electricity 
accumulates  and  hovers  around  the  glass 
screen's  surface.  This  forms  an  electro- 


iiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiimmiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii|iiiiinii^ 


magnetic  field  that  bombards  the  screen 
and  the  operator's  face,  upper  body  and 
arms  with  positively  charged  dust,  soot, 
germs  and  other  particles.  These  be- 
come lodged  in  the  skin  and  eyes  and  on 
the  screen.  This  phenomenon  probably 
accounts  for  the  red  eyes,  conjunctivitus, 
skin  rashes  and  a  gamut  of  allergic 
responses  including  fatigue,  drowsiness, 
sinus  problems,  and  headaches  that 
afflict  many  computers  users.  When  pro- 
longed, such  concentrated  exposure  can 
produce  a  "sensitized"  condition  in 
which  only  brief  exposure  to  substances 
is  sufficient  to  produce  symptoms.  The 
University  of  Pittsburgh  School  of  Medi- 
cine's Department  of  Dermatology  re- 
cently reported  "a  patient  with  a  derma- 
titis of  his  hands  and  distal  forearms 
which  we  feel  was  caused  by  exposure  to 
his  visual  display  unit  at  work." 

In  the  energy-stingy,  "sealed"  en- 
vironment of  the  modern  office,  electro- 
magnetic bombardment  from  computers 
assumes  dangerous  proportions.  Offices 
generate  copier  fumes,  including  ozone, 
and  formaldehyde,  radon,  and  other 
toxic  substances  emitted  by  the  normal 
deterioration  of  furniture,  walls,  and 
carpets.  In  addition,  harmful  micro- 
organisms and  viruses  can  grow  in 
ventilation  systems.  "Tight  Building 
Syndrome,"  "humidifier  lung,"  and 
other  colloquialisms  describe  maladies 
caused  by  toxic  particles,  germs  and 
viruses  circulating  in  poorly  ventilated 
worksites.  Researchers  now  worry  that 


particle  bombardment  from  computer- 
generated  electromagnetic  fields  may 
act  like  fuel-injection  in  cars,  accelera- 
ting the  rate  and  effects  of  exposure  to 
otherwise  small  amounts  of  ambient 
organic  and  inorganic  irritants. 

Electromagnetic  fields  also  cause  com- 
puter workers  to  inhale  an  abnormal 
concentration  of  positive  ions.  The 
absence  of  negative  ions  may  affect 
biochemistry  in  ways  that  are  not  yet 
clear,  but  that  may  induce  mood  swings 
and  long-term  health  changes  including 
insomnia,  asthma  and  hormonal  imba- 
lances. 

Radiation 

Computers  emit  two  kinds  of  radia- 
tion; ionizing  and  nonionizing.  The  more 
clearly  dangerous  of  the  two  is  ionizing 
radiation,  including  X-rays.  There  is  no 
question  that  X-rays  heat  human  tissue, 
alter  cell  structures,  and  cause  birth 
defects,  cancer,  chromosome  damage, 
premature  aging,  and  cataracts.  Govern- 
ment and  industry  officials  claim  that 
X-ray  emissions  from  computers,  like 
those  from  TV,  are  insignificant  or  nil. 

The  other  kind,  nonionizing  radiation, 
is  lower  in  energy  than  X-rays  and 
includes  visible  light,  microwaves,  infra- 
red waves,  radio  frequency  (RF)  waves, 
and  very  low  frequency  (VLF— also 
known  as  Extremely  Low  Frequency  — 
ELF)  waves  such  as  household  electrical 
current.  Computers  emit  RF,  VLF,  and 
microwave      nonionizing    radiation, 


PROCESSED  WORLD  «14 


though  the  latter  is  disputed.  VLF 
radiation  is  almost  impossible  to  ac- 
curately gauge  outside  of  a  lab. 

Desktop  computers  emit  radiation  in 
pulses  — 16,000  every  second  on  most 
models.  Radiation  levels  are  highest 
near  the  computer  terminal's  flyback 
transformer.  This  means  that  workers 
sitting  behind  or  near  computers  also 
may  be  exposed. 

Until  recently,  nonionizing  radiation 
was  thought  biologically  harmless.  But 
microwave,  RF,  and  VLF  radiation  have 
been  associated  with  blood,  cell,  brain, 
heart,  and  fertility  abnormalities.  What 
is  known  about  all  three  types  of  non- 
ionizing radiation  cannot  be  considered 
reassuring  to  computer  workers.  Con- 
sider the  following  studies: 

•  In  April,  1985,  a  Swedish  neurologist 
reported  symptoms  of  brain  damage,  an 
abnormal  spinal  fluid  protein,  and 
severe  mental  impairment  in  radar  main- 
tenance workers  exposed  to  microwave 
radiation  for  10  years  or  more. 

•  Two  studies  concluded  that  electro- 
magnetic fields  can  alter  heart  rates;  in 
one,  biologist  Allen  Grey  at  Randomline, 
Inc.  stopped  frog  hearts  with  nonionizing 
radiation;  in  another.  University  of  Utah 
researcher  John  Lords  used  microwaves 
to  speed  up  and  slow  down  turtle  hearts. 

•  A  joint  Department  of  Energy  and 
New  York  State  Department  of  Health 
study  at  the  Midwest  Research  Institute 
in  Kansas  City,  Mo.,  showed  that  a 
group  of  21-35  year-old  males  experi- 
enced slowed  heart  rates  and  altered 
brain  wave  patterns  when  exposed  to 
nonionizing  radiation  fields. 

•  A  soon-to-be-published  Maryland 
Department  of  Health  and  Mental 
Hygiene  study  of  951  men  who  died  of 
brain  tumors  between  1969  and  1982 
concluded  that  "electromagnetic  expo- 
sure may  be  associated  with  the  patho- 
genesis [onset]  of  brain  tumors."  The 
tumor-victim  study  revealed  "a  dispro- 
portionate representation  of  workers 
employed  in  occupations  associated  with 
electricity  or  electromagnetic  fields." 

•  Research  in  Czechoslovakia,  Sweden, 
and  Spain  has  linked  VLF  radiation  to 
adverse  effects  on  animal  embryos.  In 
1982,  Madrid  researchers  found  that 
pulsed  magnetic  fields  had  dramatic, 
adverse  effects  on  chick  embryos,  in- 
cluding severe  brain  damage,  undev- 
eloped nervous  systems  and  improperly 
formed  hearts.  Subsequent  research 
showed  that  such  effects  were  caused  by 
the  shape  of  the  VLF  pulse.  Additional 
tests  indicate  that,  in  both  shape  and 
intensity,  computer-emitted  VLF  pulses 
are  similar  to  those  that  damaged  the 
chick  embryos  in  Madrid. 


Sleazy  Research 

The  Madrid  findings  suggest  the  link 
between  the  eleven  clusters  of  problem 
pregnancies  and  computers.  But  the 
veracity  of  research  is  in  the  eyes  of  the 
beholder.  In  testimony  before  a  congres- 
sional committee,  representatives  from 
the  American  College  of  Obstetricians 
and  Gynecologists  rejected  radiation  as 
the  cause  of  computer  workers'  miscar- 
riages. 

No  enforceable  standards  for  exposure 
levels  to  most  kinds  of  nonionizing 
radiation  exist  in  the  U.S.;  if  they  did, 
they  would  be  enforceable  by  OSHA  only 
as  "suggested  guidelines."  U.S.  micro- 
wave exposure  levels  are  among  the 
highest  in  the  world.  Exposure  levels  for 
X-rays  are  negotiable.  For  example,  by 
dint  of  a  government-industry  agree- 
ment, hospital  and  nuclear  energy 
industry  workers  enjoy  a  5  rem  per  year 
maximum  dose  of  X-rays,  a  standard  10 
times  that  for  the  general  population. 
Existing  standards  are  the  products  of  a 
sleazy  history  of  government-sponsored 
research  into  computer  and  radiation 
hazards. 

The  U.S.  government  ignored  early 
international  warnings  about  microwave 
hazards  for  decades,  as  well  as  domestic 
studies  (conducted  by  consultants  for  the 
Department  of  Defense  in  the  50s  and 
60s)  linking  microwaves  to  cataracts. 

The  CIA  conducted  secret  microwave 
research  beginning  in  1962  after  com- 
plaints of  bleeding  eyes,  nausea,  and 
suspected  chromosome  damage  from 
U.S.  embassy  personnel  in  Moscow.  The 
USSR,  which  studied  microwaves  exten- 
sively, apparently  beamed  microwaves 
at  the  embassy.  The  results  of  the  CIA's 
research  were  kept  secret.  It's  possible 
that  the  embassy  microwave  transmis- 
sions fell  within  subsequent  U.S.  expo- 
sure levels  set  in  1966  at  10  milliwatts 
per  square  centimeter  per  hour,  a  level 
one  thousand  times  higher  than  that  of 
the  Soviet  Union.  But  it  was  not  long 
before  the  U.S.  standards  became  the 
center  of  one  of  the  first  widely 
publicized  computer  hazard  controver- 
sies. 

In  1977,  two  New  York  Times  copy 
editors  developed  cataracts  after  work- 
ing on  a  new  computer  system  for  six 
months.  Their  doctors  suggested  the  link 
between  cataracts  and  computer-emitted 
microwaves.  With  the  help  of  the 
Newspaper  Guild,  the  copy  editors 
pursued  grievance  proceedings.  NIOSH 
and  the  Center  for  Disease  Control  were 
called  in  on  the  case  and  found 
nonionizing  radiation  at  levels  below  the 
bloated  10  milliwatt  standard.  As  a 
result,  the  case  was  dropped.  Dr.  Milton 


Zaret,  an  opthalmologist,  veteran  micro- 
wave researcher,  and  consultant  for  the 
7/mes  workers,  maintained  that  no  level 
of  radiation  has  yet  been  proved  safe. 

In  1981,  with  evidence  of  microwave 
damage  mounting,  the  American  Na- 
tional Standards  Institute  adopted  a  new 
microwave  exposure  limit  of  one  milli- 
watt per  square  centimeter,  one-tenth 
the  previous  U.S.  standard,  though  still 
among  the  highest  in  the  world. 

Suspect  research  also  underpins  gov- 
ernment claims  regarding  computer- 
emitted  X-rays.  In  1981,  the  Food  and 
Drug  Administration's  (FDA's)  Bureau 
of  Radiological  Health  supposedly  tested 
125  computer  terminals  for  radiation, 
finding  that  "VDTs  emit  little  or  no 
harmful  [X-ray]  radiation  under  normal 
operating  conditions."  The  agency  also 
reported  finding  'insignificant'  amounts 
of  microwave  and  RF  radiation. 

On  the  face  of  it,  the  tests  were 
inadequate;  most  computers  were  not 
tested.  Among  those  tested,  the  highest 
emission  levels  were  estimated  to  be  2 
millirems  per  hour.  In  Office  Worl<  Can 
Be  Dangerous  To  Your  Healtti  (Pantheon 
N.Y.  1983),  Stellman  and  Henifin  note 
that:  "...at  a  typical  usage  rate  of  6 
hours  per  day  for  50  weeks  per  year,  the 
total  average  exposure  would  be  3  rems 
per  year,  which  substantially  exceeds 
the  0.5  rem  per  year  limit  for  the  general 
population.  A  pregnant  woman  opera- 
ting such  a  machine  for  36  weeks  of  her 
pregnancy  could  be  exposed  to  levels  in 
excess  of  those  recommended  by  the 
government  for  pregnant  women." 

As  it  is,  the  numbers  that  emerged 
from  the  FDA's  tests  are  hardly  what 
statistics  people  call  "robust."  In  testi- 
mony before  Congress,  Bureau  of  Radio- 
logical Health  chief  John  Villforth  ad- 
mitted that  his  agency's  reassuring  find- 
ings were  based  only  upon  theoretical 
computer  models  — the  agency  had  not 
actually  performed  any  radiation  tests. 
Dr.  Zaret  called  the  FDA's  research 
methods  "idiotic."  (Makower,  p.  118 
ibid] 

By  FCC  decree,  computers  and  kin- 
dred devices  built  after  October,  1983, 
must  emit  lesser  amounts  of  RF  radia- 
tion. Reflecting  priorities  computer  wor- 
kers may  not  fully  appreciate,  the  FCC 
was  moved  to  action  by  increasing  com- 
plaints that  RF  radiation  was  interfering 
with  radio  and  television  reception  — not 
by  concern  for  the  health  and  safety  of 
computer  users.  RF  interference  became 
a  problem  as  profit-minded  computer 
manufacturers  shifted  from  the  safer, 
metal  computer  shells  to  cheaper,  plastic 
ones.  Compared  to  metal,  plastic  pro- 
vides little  or  no    radiation  protection. 


46 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


Now        w^ 


\ 


MqcFoq!! 


X 


,.-*o*^ 


N 


"\ 


The  Personal  Computing  Ideology  of  MacFog!  will  make  YOU 
BELIEVE  that  personal  computers  will  lead  to  increased  democracy  and 
personal  empowerment.  MacFog!  will  make  the  dank  reality  of  the 
computer  state  disappear  behind  the  glowing  mists  of  high-resolution 
graphics.  MacFog!  will  make  YOU  feel  better  despite  the  almost  certain 
prospect  of  techno-bureaucratic  enslavement!  BUY  YOURS  TODAY! 

The  Macintosh  Revolution 


Apparently,  though,  computers  sold 
since  the  1983  FCC  ruling  took  effect 
continue  to  leak  significant  levels  of  RF 
radiation.  At  a  cost  of  over  $1  billion 
annually,  computer  equipment  bought 
by  the  National  Security  Agency  through 
its  Tempest  program  is  "ruggedized"  — 
i.e.,  shielded  or  covered  with  electrically 
conductive  plastic  or  paint  to  seal  off  RF 
radiation.  The  NSA  wants  to  preempt 
electronic  eavesdropping  through  RF 
signal  detection,  not  prevent  RF  radia- 
tion symptoms  among  its  workers. 

in  light  of  all  this,  the  announcement 
of  a  new  epidemiological  computer 
hazards  study  by  NIOSH  is  a  qualified 
bright  spot.  NIOSH  will  examine  6,000 
married,  employed  women  of  child- 
bearing  age;  half  of  the  subjects  will  be 
computer  operators  in  nonmanagement 
positions,  and  the  other  half  will  be 
nonusers  acting  as  the  study's  control 
group.  The  NIOSH  study  may  someday 
produce  profound  results.  But  Micro- 
wave News  editor  Louis  Slesin  cautions 
us  not  to  hold  our  breath:  "[The  NIOSH 
study]  will  take  three  years  to  complete 
after  a  study  population  is  selected  and  a 
questionnaire  is  cleared  by  the  federal 
Office  of  Management  and  Budget.  The 
latter    step    alone    could    take    years." 


Slesin  observes  of  previous  NIOSH  com- 
puter hazards  research  "After  conduct- 
ing numerous  [job  site]  surveys  of  VDT 
radiation  levels  and  issuing  countless 
assurances  that  radiation  emissions  are 
not  threatening,  NIOSH  staff  members 
admitted  in  the  spring  of  1983  that  they 
could  not  measure  VLF  [radiation]  at  a 
job  site." 

The  NIOSH  study  bucks  a  trend.  This 
October,  the  EPA  will  dissolve  its  non- 
ionizing radiation  research  group  at  the 
Health  Effects  Research  Laboratory  in 
Research  Triangle  Park,  N.C.  Last  year, 
the  EPA  concluded  a  five-year  study  of 
broadcast  frequencies,  which  is  said  to 
be  responsible  for  90%  of  the  non- 
ionizing radiation  to  which  Americans 
are  exposed.  On  the  eve  of  publication 
of  the  EPA's  suggested  guidelines  in  the 
Federal  Register,  they  were  dropped  as 
a  result  of  what  the  Washington  Post 
called  "a  high-level,  internal  agency 
review."  The  Post  characterized  the 
guidelines  as  "the  first  step  toward 
setting  standards  for  nonionizing  radia- 
tion exposure  to  the  general  popula- 
tion." Even  the  Department  of  Defense, 
which  can  hardly  complain  of  under- 
funding,  is  drastically  cutting  monies  for 
nonionizing  radiation  research.  And  this 


fall,  the  Department  of  Energy  is 
slashing  by  one  half  the  budget  for  its 
Electric  Energy  Systems  Division,  which 
studies  the  effects  of  power  lines  on 
health. 

Computer  Legislation 

Last  year,  9  to  5,  the  National 
Association  of  Working  Women,  and  the 
Service  Employees  International  Union 
undertook  lobbying  campaigns  to  intro- 
duce computer  safety  bills  in  18  state 
legislatures.  Approximately  25  states  are 
expected  to  hear  such  bills  this  year. 

The  proposed  legislation  varies  wide- 
ly, from  right-to-know  bills  that  would 
familiarize  workers  with  healthful  com- 
puter use  and  maintenance,  to  computer 
purchasing  guidelines  for  state  agencies, 
to  so-called  "ergonomic  bills"  requiring 
employers  to  provide  nonglare  shields, 
adjustable  screens,  removable  key- 
boards, work  breaks,  and/or  non-com- 
puter work  for  pregnant  workers. 

As  of  March  this  year,  computer 
hazards  legislation  was  furthest  along  in 
Oregon.  The  proposed  bill,  a  diluted 
version  of  one  introduced  last  year, 
would  require  the  state  to  set  up  an 
education  program  for  employers  and 
generate  guidelines  for  computer  use. 
But  the  guidelines  would  be  optional  for 
private  employers,  and  binding  only  for 
state  agencies  where  computers  are  used 
for  four  hours  or  more  each  day. 
Computers  already  in  use  would  be 
exempted. 

Oregon  Governor  Victor  Atiyeh,  with 
one  eye  on  the  developing  Beaverton- 
area  high  tech  industry  ("Silicon  For- 
est"), pledges  to  veto  the  bill.  Beaver- 
ton-based  Tektronix  Corp.,  a  giant  com- 
puter firm  and  the  state's  largest 
employer,  leads  the  opposition.  Tek- 
tronix makes  large,  high  resolution 
computer  screens  that  may  pose  a  higher 
risk  to  users  than  smaller  computer 
screens.  Ironically,  the  higher-risk  group 
includes  computer-making  engineers, 
who  work  with  the  larger  screens  to 
design  and  layout  microchip  logic. 

In  Massachusetts,  hearings  on  seven 
computer  safety  bills  were  scheduled  to 
begin  in  April.  The  state  legislature  has 
rejected  such  bills  during  each  of  the 
past  five  years,  boasts  the  Associated 
Industries  of  Massachusetts,  a  coalition 
of  pro-computer  industries.  Last  year, 
according  to  ComputerWorld  (March  25, 
1985),  Massachusetts  decreed  voluntary 
computer  safety  guidelines  and  pur- 
chasing specifications,  and  granted 
$75,000  to  study  computer  hazards. 
According  to  9  to  5's  Elaine  Taber,  the 
voluntary  guidelines  are  for  public  sector 
workers  only  and  do  not  comprehen- 
sively address  computer  hazards. 


PROCESSED  WORLD  #14 


47 


In  California  last  year,  a  heavy 
industry  lobby  persuaded  politicians  to 
drop  proposed  computer  hazards  legis- 
lation. The  bill,  introduced  by  Tom 
Hayden,  called  for  adequate  lighting, 
periodic  breaks,  and  glare  screens  or 
brightness  and  contrast  controls  for 
computer  workers.  It  also  mandated 
radiation  shielding  and  alternative  work 
for  pregnant  women  — demands  that 
were  dropped  "for  strategic  reasons," 
according  to  a  supporter,  when  the  bill 
was  re-introduced  in  the  state  legislature 
this  year.  That  bill  was  recently  tabled, 
and  proponents  have  conceded  defeat. 
Another  bill  mandating  employer  cover- 
age of  eye  exams  and  corrective  lenses 
for  computer  workers  is  pending  in  the 
California  Senate.  A  third  bill  establish- 
ing computer  purchasing  guidelines  for 
the  state  also  was  tabled,  though  the 
California  Office  of  Information  Tech- 
nology reportedly  has  adopted  similar 
guidelines. 

Corporate  opposition  to  computer 
safety  bills  is  not  difficult  to  understand. 
Even  such  relatively  weak  laws  as  those 
being  mulled  in  Oregon,  Massachusetts, 
and  elsewhere  impart  legitimacy  to  the 
issue  of  computer  hazards.  With  up- 
wards of  $70  billion  in  yearly  computer 
sales,  the  thought  of  litigating  computer 
hazard  claims  raises  hair  on  corporate 
heads.  The  damages  for  computer 
hazard  suits  could  make  the  sums 
sought  in  the  Johns  Manville  asbestos 
class  action  look  like  pin  money. 

"Advice  to  managers  and  users  is  the 
best  way  to  make  people  more  comfort- 
able in  the  office,  reduce  stress,  and  let 
people  know  that  visual  displays  are 
completely  safe,"  testified  Vico  Hen- 
riques  before  the  House  Subcommittee 
on  Health  and  Safety.  Henriques  recom- 
mends the  advice  of  the  Computer  and 
Business  Equipment  Manufacturers  As- 
sociation (CBEMA)  whose  president  he 
is.  Henriques  argues  that  "legislative 
mandates  [limiting  exposure  to  com- 
puters] would  force  citizens  to  conform 
to  a  legislator's  supposition  about  what 
will  make  them  feel  better."  The 
CBEMA  evidently  prefers  a  status  quo  in 
which  citizens  conform  to  CBEMA's 
suppositions  about  computer  safety. 
Accordingly,  CBEMA  plans  a  multi- 
media promotional  campaign  aimed  at 
countering  what  Henriques  terms  the 
"public's  delight  in  the  sensational" 
stories  about  miscarriages  and  the  wide- 
spread "misconception"  [sic]  that  com- 
puter work  isn't  mentally  stimulating. 
[Science  for  the  People  March/ April 
'85). 

CBEMA  recently  joined  with  like- 
minded  associations  to  form  the  Coali- 


tion tor  Office  Technology.  The  Coalition 
is  establishing  an  information  center  in 
Washington  DC.  to  provide  moral  and 
logistical  guidance  in  local  battles  against 
state  computer  hazards  legislation.  The 
Coalition  includes  such  disinterested 
parties  as  IBM,  Digital  Equipment 
Corporation,  the  American  Insurance 
Association,  the  American  Newspaper 
Publishers  Association,  and  the  Air 
Transport  Association  of  America 
(ATA).  The  ATA  represents  31  airline 
corporations  employing  150,000  compu- 
ter workers  and,  according  to  Computer- 
World,  "tracks  up  to  4,000  bills  filed 
nationwide  each  year." 

Workers  on  Their  Own 

Computer  workers  tied  for  long  hours 
to  their  terminals  with  little  immediate 
control  over  how  they  use  them  are 
probably  most  vulnerable  to  computer 
hazards.  The  suggestions  below  apply  to 
all  computer  workers. 

Opthalmologists  recommend  twice- 
yearly  eye  examinations  to  monitor  and 
correct  computer-induced  visual  prob- 
lems. It's  best  to  seek  out  physicians 
familiar  with  computer  hazards. 

According  to  a  nonbinding  NIOSH 
recommendation,  "a  15  minute  work- 
rest  break  should  be  taken  after  one 
hour  of  continuous  VDT  work  for 
operators  under  high  visual  demands, 
high  workload  or  those  engaged  in 
repetitive  work  tasks."  The  British 
Association  of  Scientific,  Technical  and 
Managerial  Staffs  (ASTMS),  agrees,  and 
also  suggests  a  less  qualified  proposal 
for  all  computer  workers:  "No  more  than 
four  hours  [in  front  of  a  computer] 
should  be  worked  in  any  one  day." 

These  and  other  preventive  measures 
inevitably  raise  broader  questions  about 
the  workplace  control  and  use  of 
computers  — questions  that  transcend 
computer  hazards.  Some  of  those  haz- 
ards are  amenable  to  technical  fixes. 

The  NSA's  efforts  to  silence  computer 
RF  signals  may  spur  development  of 
affordable,  accessible  radiation  contain- 
ment technologies.  At  the  moment, 
however,  NSA  "ruggedizing"  adds  a 
100-300%  premium  to  the  cost  of  a 
desk-top  computer. 


Fortunately,  less  expensive  computer 
shielding  is  available  now.  The  conduc- 
tive mesh  filters  fit  over  computer 
screens  and  prevent  formation  of  an 
electromagnetic  field,  absorbing  and 
safely  draining  radiation  emitted 
through  a  screen.  (Conductive  mesh 
shielding  that  covers  an  entire  computer 
is  also  reportedly  available.)  In  addition, 
the  filters  reduce  glare  without  reducing 
image  resolution.  Priced  at  under  $100, 
the  conductive  filters  cost  less  than  many 
nonconductive  screen  shields  that  re- 
duce glare  only. 

If  computer-making  corporations  de- 
signed and  built-in  protection  during 
manufacture  (they  don't),  the  cost  of 
containing  radiation  emissions  would 
drop  dramatically. 

Unable  to  rely  on  immediate  relief 
from  the  legislative  front,  concerned 
workers  are  quietly  winning  small  vic- 
tories by  directly  confronting  the  prob- 
lem. When  confronted,  corporations  that 
help  sponsor  popular  ignorance  of 
computer  hazards  show  surprising 
flexibility. 

IBM  publicly  denies  evidence  linking 
its  computers  to  hazards,  but  allows  its 
Silicon  Valley  workers  to  purchase  con- 
ductive screen  filters  at  company  ex- 
pense. At  another  Silicon  Valley  firm, 
chipmaker  LSI  Logic  Corporation,  com- 
puter workers  now  have  an  open  pur- 
chasing order  for  conductive  filters 
despite  their  former  president's  active 
efforts  to  defeat  the  Hayden-sponsored 
computer  safety  bills. 

In  view  of  the  government  and 
industry's  records  on  computer  hazards, 
such  direct  initiatives  probably  provide 
the  most  reliable  protection.  Computer 
workers  are  on  their  own. 

—  by  Dennis  Hayes 

[Processed  World  is  collecting  informa- 
tion on  computer  hazards  and  "office 
ecology.  "  If  you  have  some,  pass  it  on.  If 
you  need  some — including  names  and 
addresses  of  firms  making  conductive 
mesh  filters  for  computer  screens— write 
us.  We'll  try  to  help.] 


Processed  World,  55  Sutter  Street  #829,  San  Francisco,  California  94104,  USA